The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:02, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Countries in topic template where only one link ( Agritourism in Serbia) exists. OwenBlacker ( Talk) 20:44, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Unused template Brayan Jaimes ( talk) 19:58, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was merged Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
These four templates all concern the First Presidency of the LDS Church and as such they end up cross sharing the same pages. I have done similar merges in the past, but not so many at once, so I just had to make some adjustments to incorporate the proper wording. Therefore I have done the coding and you can see how they would be merged together in my userspace
If you note, if any of the current versions can of the templates will still be available, if desired, however, I would suspect that they wont be used much. Additionally if there are any concerns or suggestion I would be willing to implement them. -- ARTEST4ECHO ( talk/ contribs) 16:09, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was update the portal bar template to either use the same lua module as {{ portal}}, or to use the portal bar module, which ever is deemed most appropriate. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:Portal bar with
Template:Portal.
Its function is similar to {{
Portal}}. We can safely merge this into {{
Portal}} by adding bar parameter.
Rezonansowy (
talk •
contribs)
14:50, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
bar
function to
Module:Portal than to merge the actual templates. If we merged the templates we would need to go through and change all the {{
portal bar}} invocations, but if we do the work in
Module:Portal we would only have to alter
Template:Portal bar itself. —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪
22:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)bar
function to
Module:Portal and then change
Template:Portal bar.
Hawkeye7 (
talk)
21:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)bar
function to the module won't have any effect on the speed of the existing portal
function, as it won't be accessed when {{
portal}} is called. Also, {{
portal}} and {{
portal bar}} share the same image-getting code, so it makes sense to have them in the same module. (Although I suppose you could just as easily use
Module:Portal's image-getting code from another module.) In addition, porting the template to Lua will remove the 18-portal limit, and will prevent the template from showing an empty white box if no portals are specified. —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪
10:57, 6 September 2013 (UTC)The result of the discussion was relisted on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 September 17. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 September 17. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:43, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Only three links, all of which are already linked in the club article, diffcult to see how this is of any real use. Fenix down ( talk) 08:46, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Only four links, one of which is to a section in an article already linked. Not everything needs a navbox. Fenix down ( talk) 08:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Navbox being used more like infobox. Contains only five links of which two are links to sections within the main club article and one is a duplicate of the 2013 season link. Difficult to see how this is a useful navbox. Fenix down ( talk) 08:43, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Navbox being used more like infobox. Contains only six links of which two are links to sections within the main club article, one is a duplicate of the 2011 season link and one a link to the general FC New York Category page which is atthe bottom of all relevant articles anyway. Difficult to see how this is a useful navbox and as the club has now been dissolved it is difficult to see how it can be expanded in any useful way in the future. Fenix down ( talk) 08:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
contains only four links, two of which are to sections within the original club article, difficult to see how this is a useful navbox. Fenix down ( talk) 08:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Removed one link to a non-related article. Navbox only contains four links, one of which is the club itself, one to the players category, one to an old ground and a final one to the current ground (which is alredy linked in the club article). Hard to see how this is a helpful aid to navigation. Fenix down ( talk) 08:19, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Unused template Brayan Jaimes ( talk) 02:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:02, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Countries in topic template where only one link ( Agritourism in Serbia) exists. OwenBlacker ( Talk) 20:44, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Unused template Brayan Jaimes ( talk) 19:58, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was merged Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
These four templates all concern the First Presidency of the LDS Church and as such they end up cross sharing the same pages. I have done similar merges in the past, but not so many at once, so I just had to make some adjustments to incorporate the proper wording. Therefore I have done the coding and you can see how they would be merged together in my userspace
If you note, if any of the current versions can of the templates will still be available, if desired, however, I would suspect that they wont be used much. Additionally if there are any concerns or suggestion I would be willing to implement them. -- ARTEST4ECHO ( talk/ contribs) 16:09, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was update the portal bar template to either use the same lua module as {{ portal}}, or to use the portal bar module, which ever is deemed most appropriate. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:Portal bar with
Template:Portal.
Its function is similar to {{
Portal}}. We can safely merge this into {{
Portal}} by adding bar parameter.
Rezonansowy (
talk •
contribs)
14:50, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
bar
function to
Module:Portal than to merge the actual templates. If we merged the templates we would need to go through and change all the {{
portal bar}} invocations, but if we do the work in
Module:Portal we would only have to alter
Template:Portal bar itself. —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪
22:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)bar
function to
Module:Portal and then change
Template:Portal bar.
Hawkeye7 (
talk)
21:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)bar
function to the module won't have any effect on the speed of the existing portal
function, as it won't be accessed when {{
portal}} is called. Also, {{
portal}} and {{
portal bar}} share the same image-getting code, so it makes sense to have them in the same module. (Although I suppose you could just as easily use
Module:Portal's image-getting code from another module.) In addition, porting the template to Lua will remove the 18-portal limit, and will prevent the template from showing an empty white box if no portals are specified. —
Mr. Stradivarius
♪ talk ♪
10:57, 6 September 2013 (UTC)The result of the discussion was relisted on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 September 17. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 September 17. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:43, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Only three links, all of which are already linked in the club article, diffcult to see how this is of any real use. Fenix down ( talk) 08:46, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Only four links, one of which is to a section in an article already linked. Not everything needs a navbox. Fenix down ( talk) 08:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Navbox being used more like infobox. Contains only five links of which two are links to sections within the main club article and one is a duplicate of the 2013 season link. Difficult to see how this is a useful navbox. Fenix down ( talk) 08:43, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Navbox being used more like infobox. Contains only six links of which two are links to sections within the main club article, one is a duplicate of the 2011 season link and one a link to the general FC New York Category page which is atthe bottom of all relevant articles anyway. Difficult to see how this is a useful navbox and as the club has now been dissolved it is difficult to see how it can be expanded in any useful way in the future. Fenix down ( talk) 08:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
contains only four links, two of which are to sections within the original club article, difficult to see how this is a useful navbox. Fenix down ( talk) 08:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Removed one link to a non-related article. Navbox only contains four links, one of which is the club itself, one to the players category, one to an old ground and a final one to the current ground (which is alredy linked in the club article). Hard to see how this is a helpful aid to navigation. Fenix down ( talk) 08:19, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Unused template Brayan Jaimes ( talk) 02:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)