The result of the discussion was delete. While discussion on a suitable replacement for the obsolete HTML tag has somewhat overshadowed the discussion for the template, there is consensus to delete the template, and replace the current transclusions. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Used on only 28 10 articles. Content is <center>{{{1}}}</center>
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
21:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
<center>
is obsolete, {{
center}} uses proper CSS. Low use is not worthy of a redirect. By appropriate, I mean where center is useful; I have found a number of uses in tables with wikitable
class which styles to centered columns. --
Gadget850
talk
18:52, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
<center>
is obsolete", they were not referring to Wiki markup, but to the HTML tag, which
officially became obsolete three days ago (after
nearly five years of proposed obsolescence which followed
more than ten years of deprecation). It is in the sense of "out of date" that Gadget850 was using the term. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
14:13, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
<center>
was valid through HTML3, deprecated in HTML4 and now obsolete in HTML5. The {{
center}} template has been updated to use the replacement CSS. {{
Ctr}} has never been updated; it could certainly be updated, but it would then just be a copy. --
Gadget850
talk
14:39, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
{{
tl}}
, not {{
tag}}
, I suspect. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
18:45, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
{{subst:}}
? Then why hardcode the deprecated tag in articles? And in this thread I smell a "{center} covers it, mostly I guess, sometimes, basic.". (btw, the nom did not mention the obsolete aspect and did not have a replacement option at hand. Was it just usage counting?). Just mentin the (working) replacement, esp in wikitables. All those years of deprecation. -
DePiep (
talk)
18:52, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
<noinclude>{| class="wikitable"
|-
|</noinclude>style="vertical-align: middle; text-align: center; {{{style|}}}" |{{{1|}}}<noinclude>
|}
{{Documentation|Template:Table cell templates/doc}}
</noinclude>
{{Ctr}}
, whose meaning is opaque.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:39, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Template | Resulting markup | Comment |
---|---|---|
{{ Center|Some text}} in a table | <table>
<tr>
<td>
<div
class="center"
style="width:auto; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto;">
Some text
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
|
Most of the times OK. It creates a block element that might not adhere to table style. |
{{ Ctr|Some text}} – existing version | <table>
<tr>
<td>
<center>
Some text
</center>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
|
Some people here have argued correctly that <center>...</center> is deprecated and is no longer standard HTML. Is it important, especially when MediaWiki is not an epitome of using standard syntax?
|
{{ Ctr|Some text}} – Codename Lisa's proposal | <table>
<tr>
<td style="vertical-align: middle; text-align: center;">
Some text
</td>
</tr>
</table>
|
Standard, clean and within appropriate CSS scope |
<center>...</center>
tags.
—PC
-XT
+
05:45, 15 November 2014 (UTC){{Center}}
. <center>...</center>
is deprecated in
HTML5 and isn't part of wikitext. There is no reason to ask the developers to make it wikitext either. Just use the replacement css (or the other template that synthesizes it for you). I agree there isn't enough use and typing two extra "e"s isn't going to kill anyone. As for the proposed re-purposing, I don't think it adds anything beneficial to the encyclopedia. I'd rather see classes for this (assuming they don't already exist, and
Edokter might be able to expand on whether or not class="center"
or something similar might not already do what is asked for in re-purposing... — {{U|
Technical 13}} (
e •
t •
c)
22:56, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
.center
does basically do what you want, but also set width: 100%;
, which {{
center}} in turn resets to auto;
. Not the most elegant solution. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
23:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
.center
over using <center>. It's both equally bad - apart from the relatively meaningless distinction that the tag is officially obsolete in HTML5 - but it's exceedingly unlikely that any browser will stop supporting the tag any time soon. There are a couple of other options. An inline style roughly per Lisa's example (with the exception that I don't really know what the vertical-align is doing there. It is the default for td elements anyway, and if overridden in some way, there is probably a good reason as to why it is overridden). Personally, I prefer the style directly in the table rather than obfuscating it behind a template, but YMMV.example of use in different forms
| ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
.center
not semantic? It depends on context; it may have no semantic relation the the content, but it surely has a functional relation. Take .nowrap
... this is a functional class, and so is .center
. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
18:57, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
<center>
being obsolete is not about semantics; it is about the danger that it is no longer part of HTML5, which we serve. There is a real danger of browsers no longer supporting/ignoring it when rendering HTML5; I don't care what the 'chances' are. Also note that <center>
is whitelisted HTML, not wikimarkup. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
22:57, 16 November 2014 (UTC)align="center"
were replaced by one CSS style with a reduction of over 10k bytes. --
Gadget850
talk
18:48, 23 December 2014 (UTC)style="text-align:center;"
CSS, either directly or using Lisa's proposed new template.
SiBr4 (
talk)
11:17, 15 January 2015 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:03, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
The fictional universe is still developing, and once it is officially titled with more films released, this template shall be revived. Moreover, no future DC comics film (except Dawn of Justice) has yet entered production. Kailash29792 ( talk) 15:47, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2014 December 7. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete after replacing with {{ infobox food}}. If someone wants to redirect it, go ahead. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:56, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox prepared food}}, as shown in this edit - indeed, the latter template offers better data fields. Only 29 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:40, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Infobox prepared food}}
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
14:15, 17 November 2014 (UTC){{Infobox prepared food}}
; use that (or better, reverse their naming).
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
14:19, 22 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:36, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox legislature}}. Only 11 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Infobox legislature}}
seems perfectly adequate for the job; it is used, for example, on
59th Utah State Legislature. Alternatively, {{
Infobox legislative session}} exists and is used on
57th Utah State Legislature.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
10:23, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Infobox template with 120 transclusions, originally created as a fork of {{
Infobox court case}}, to which it is redundant, as demonstrated
here. A previous
discussion in April this year reached no consensus, but since then the two alternative templates have been merged at {{Infobox court case}}
. A redirect would allow the US-DC-specific name to be retained.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
19:28, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Infobox court case}}
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:26, 15 November 2014 (UTC)"...a fork of {{ Infobox court case}}, to which it is redundant, as demonstrated here". Have you reviewed the linked page? It appears to address your former concerns, fully. Your latter points appear to be around hypothetical problems with no basis in fact. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
"...a fork of {{ Infobox court case}}, to which it is redundant, as demonstrated here". Having checked that page, you will have seen that the parameters to which you refer are already present in the more generic template, If you do not discuss your apparent concerns with them, how am I or anyone else supoesed to address them? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
"...a fork of {{ Infobox court case}}, to which it is redundant, as demonstrated here". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
"All parameters from the TfD'ed template now present. My conclusion: A redirect would not malform or misrepresent any parameter (and the target template has a nicer layout using headers etc.).". You will see that the nomination links to a testcases page which shows that the nominated template is redundant to the more generic one. What would you merge? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:55, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{
Infobox criminal organization}} {{
Infobox organization}} (into which any unique and required parameters should be merged).
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
19:14, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
The parameters in {{ Infobox criminal organization}} with no equivalent in {{ Infobox organization}} are:
|named after=
|founding_location=
|years_active=
(use |formation=
& |extinction=
)|ethnicity=
|rivals=
None of these are unique to criminal organisations; all may apply to non-criminal organisations, and their totality does not justify a separate template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:45, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
|years active=
parameter would be useful in the target, as many organisations (particularly corporations) continue to exist long after they cease trading. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough, 22:36, 22 November 2014 (UTC).The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:26, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:Infobox U.S. legislation with
Template:Infobox legislation.
Redundancy.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
19:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
The claim of "redundancy" might be appropriate at the technical, template level but is woefully lacking when understanding & working with the actual content at hand.-- George Orwell III ( talk) 01:12, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Template:Infobox U.S. Legislation
is a one off call made directly to Template:Infobox
, the mother/parent of all Infoboxes. How is that redundant? What is pointless is making it a redirect to another template that is also a one off call being made directly to the same base Infobox template -- in effect making it twice removed from the parent instead of just once directly. There is no redundancy issue here that cannot be overcome with simple adjustments in categorization if anything at all. And normally I'd agree to the premise of a possible reduction in maintenance overhead if at least the css and/or inline stylings matched up -- but they don't in this case. I would think that fork alone would increase the amount wrangling needed to maintain the distinct styling for both viens in a single template never mind the difference gap in actual utilization world-wide."Merging" something like Template:Infobox UK Legislation might make far more sense to do; not only because the rendering of the two are nearly identical layout & style wise, but much of the parameters, labeling, content and their default values better align with other legislative bodies (ca, nz, au, etc.) more so than they ever would with the U.S's. I shouldn't have to be familiar with the intricacies of the majority of the world's legislative output just to be able to navigate a single one - a rather unique one at that (so much for "cognitive load"). The fact the UK one handles Wales, Scotland, Ireland and the like ultimately goes against the premise that consolidation automatically usurps "uniqueness" at the end of the day too... or somehow will increase value over the long haul as well.
Sorry. I just don't think its worth doing. -- George Orwell III ( talk) 11:48, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
In addition, I don't appreciate being 'bold texted' [well establish to be the equivalent of shouting someone down] by somebody who is suppose to be running a formal, constructive proposal. I really didn't expect the usual User talk page roustabout for simply voicing my opposition here. So without an apology first, I see no reason to comment any further either way. Good Luck. -- George Orwell III ( talk) 12:38, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
"well established..."citation needed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:09, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
|royal_assent=
? And how does it help you if the parameter list does not mention SCOTUS? As for complicated parameters - isn't that to be solved within the template? (if it's complicated for US legislature, how would it be simpler for general legislature?). This last point is for template improvement, not for throwing all bads together in one template. -
DePiep (
talk)
22:13, 17 November 2014 (UTC)|effective date=
/ |date_effective=
; |introducedby=
/ |introduced_by=
, etc.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
22:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. During the course of the discussion it was re-written as a wrapper for {{ Infobox officeholder}}. There may be consensus for merging it with {{ Infobox officeholder}}, but that template was not tagged for merging. However, feel free to renominate for merging along with another template if you still want it merged. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:51, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox officeholder}} (into which any unique parameters should be merged). Could be made a wrapper. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:24, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been rendered moot, as the template is now a wrapper for the officeholder infobox (I didn't realise Frietjes' rewrite, mentioned above, was live and not in their userspace - thanks, for that,
Frietjes). The two missing parameter, |salary=
, which may not be used, and |institutions=
are catered for by the |blank=
parameters. If they're not needed, all we need to decide is whether to keep the wrapper, or have a bot Subst: it.
See:
for tracking, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. While this was orphaned out of process, there seems a rough consensus to delete anyway. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 07:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Redundant to {{
Infobox university}} (into which the one or two unique parameters should be merged; and to which {{
Infobox university school}} already redirects). Only 10 transclusions. Orphaned
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
18:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:29, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox university}} (into which the one or two unique parameters should be merged; and to which {{ Infobox university school}} already redirects). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:17, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Infobox university school}}
already redirects to {{
Infobox university}}, which already serves for either a whole university, or a single department, through the use of its |parent=
parameter.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
21:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. There is a rough consensus to delete, and while the transclusions were removed out-of-process, now that the template isn't used anywhere the discussion about merging it is moot. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox university}}, to which {{ Infobox college}} redirects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:16, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
|telephone=
, which should not be in an infobox per
WP:NOTDIRECTORY; |ds=
(meaning "deputy superintendent"), for which, if it is not added to the more generic template, there are |head=
and |head_label=
; |alumni_website=
, which arguably also should not be present, but which could be added to the generic template if a need exists; and some style overrides which appear to be (and should be) deprecated.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
17:27, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Medical school}}
- hence another possibly redundant template out there?
Montanabw
(talk)
20:45, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
|management=
, |directorate=
, |department=
, |alumni=
and |profess=
don't have equivalents in {{
infobox university}}. some could be handled by |free=
and |head=
, but there is also |vp=
and |ds=
so if you have too many of these there aren't enough free labels to handle them all.
Frietjes (
talk)
18:49, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
|directorate=
and (most likely "or") |department=
would use |parent=
. |vp=
is directly equivalent to |vice-president=
. |ds=
to |deputy_superintendent=
, now in {{
Infobox university}}.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
18:57, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
|head=
.
Frietjes (
talk)
19:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)In case anyone is still in any doubt about the redundancy of the nominated template: even before this TfD, {{ Infobox university}} was already in use on:
and many more besides; in fact, on far more medical college articles then the nominated template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:17, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was No consensus. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 07:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Used in only two articles. Content is ||style="text-align:right;{{#if:{{{1|}}}|color:#000000;background:#{{{1}}};}}"|
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
style=
attribute to style sheets is often ideal from a HTML point of view, but in order to do that, a style sheet needs the appropriate rule adding first. See my comments of 01:00, 2 November 2014 at
#Hotcold templates for why this is impractical; and as noted above, more than one class is required.
Press Freedom Index uses seven values for the parameter (98FB98, CFC, CFF, F9D, FDD, FF6, FFD}, and
Global Innovation Index uses five values (ccffcc, ccffff, ff3333, ff9900, ffffcc). Two of these are common, so ten classes would be needed to replace these uses alone. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
12:00, 6 November 2014 (UTC)style="{{paramters.map(key:value).join(';')}}"
. If the above RfC happens soon we don't even need that. But having such a discussion doesn't belong in a single TfD discussion IMO - so for the time being: keep.
Martijn Hoekstra (
talk)
09:51, 10 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete, now that changes were made to make this obsolete, and there appear to be no objections to the changes. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:48, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
No meaningful content. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:35, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
{{
Election box gain with party link}}
the |loser=
parameter is mandatory. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
18:43, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Whig gain from ? | Swing | N/A | |||
Whig gain from | Swing | N/A | |||
Whig gain from (unknown) | Swing | N/A |
{{
Election box gain with party link}}
.
Frietjes (
talk)
15:54, 30 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:53, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Used in only one article. Content is style="background: #e5e5e5"
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
|colour=silver
to activate this. "background" genericizes the name, as the content is usable for things other than lines. --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
07:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:53, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Used in only one article. Content is style="background: #eecc99"
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:35, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
|colour=bronze
to activate this. "background" genericizes the name, as the content is usable for things other than lines. --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
07:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was No consensus for proposed change. Delete arguments are probably strongest (so do fix the issues noted) but not even a solid majority. The status quo is strongly opposed so deleting the existing page. Guy ( Help!) 23:59, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Content is style="background: #EFEFEF"
. Used on 192 articles, of which 185 use a redirect from {{
Ligne grise}}, whose name will be opaque to most editors.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
style="background: #EFEFEF"
; we don't need a template for that. It is inly used in a tiny proportion of our articles.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
22:18, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
"Templates for which none of these [reasons in that section] apply may be deleted by consensus here. ". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
|colour=grey
to activate this. "background" genericizes the name, as the content is usable for things other than lines. Delete the redirect {{
ligne grise}} as it is not English, and is used to indicate a colour code, so should be English. --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
07:55, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:53, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Used in only one article. Content is style="background: #fffcaf"
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
|colour=gold
to activate this. "background" genericizes the name, as the content is usable for things other than lines. --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
07:52, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Subst and delete. Jackmcbarn ( talk) 04:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Used in only six articles. Content is style="background-color: {{{1}}}"
. Subst: and delete.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was merge with {{ Infobox London station}} Magioladitis ( talk) 22:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to either {{ Infobox UK disused station}} or {{ Infobox London station}}, into one or other of which the small number of differing parameters should be merged. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
"into one or other of which the small number of differing parameters should be merged". In particular, there is no reason why the latter needs to only be for open stations. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:46, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Limited use (12 lines). Redundant to {{ Infobox rail line}} (see Circle line (London Underground), for example). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:01, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete as redundant to {{ Infobox station}} Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 21:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox station}}. Could be made a wrapper of that, in the first instance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:55, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Parameter match and comparisons | |
---|---|
Infobox Taiwan station | Infobox station |
name | {{{native_name}}} |
name2 | NONE Sub name Chinese Redundant to "nameeng2" |
nameeng | {{{name}}} |
nameeng2 | {{{other_name}}} |
image | {{{image}}} |
imagesize | {{{image_size}}} |
caption | {{{image_caption}}} |
province municipality county city township village district |
These are all part of the address with no need to show complete structure in an article about a station |
address | {{{address}}} |
latitude | {{{latitude}}} |
longitude | {{{longitude}}} |
type | {{{structure}}} NOT {{{type}}} |
open | {{{opened}}} |
oldname | {{{former}}} |
presentname | {{{former}}} |
close | {{{closed}}} |
reopen | {{{rebuilt}}}? ADD "reopened" |
code | {{{code}}} |
lines | {{{line}}} |
wenshan neihu tucheng banqiao nangang tamsui xinbeitou xinyi xindian xiaobitan xiaonanmen songshan zhonghe xinzhuang luzhou circular northsouth wandashulin airport kmrtred kmrtorange western taichung sealine pingtung yilan northlink huadong southlink pingxi linkou neiwan jiji |
{{{line}}} and/or {{{code}}} Taiwan line names and the entry is for the station code Displays under Line(s) |
operator operator2 operator3 |
Merge in {{{operator}}} |
operatorb | Is this {{{style}}}? |
TRAlevel | Use a subtemplate |
TRAeleccode | |
TRAstartlocal | |
TRAmileage | |
bus | {{{connections}}} |
The result of the discussion was keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:49, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Limited use (five tram lines); replace with {{ Infobox rail line}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:31, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
|alt=
, or the Image module in Lua, or added microformats. Each infobox had to updated (except those we haven't yet got around to...), separately. The more infoboxes, the more work there is to do.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
22:43, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus on whether to merge or to renominate to merge and merge then. Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 10:02, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Single use, despite being created over seven years ago. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:56, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Swarm X 03:14, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Single use (and that's poor quality). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:54, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Swarm X 03:16, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Used on only 14 biographies (where it is redundant to {{ Infobox person}}) and one event (where it is redundant to {{ Infobox event}}; or possibly {{ Infobox civil conflict}}). We have, AFAICT, no other infobox which is used in this fashion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
|role=
, use |known_for=
, rewording as necessary - for example, change "Catesby's retainer" to "Acting as Catesby's retainer in the
Gunpowder Plot".
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
21:03, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
"redundant to {{ Infobox event}}; or possibly {{ Infobox civil conflict}}", in the nomination, above Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:50, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
|transcription_name=
and this discussion, so we should probably direct further comments on this to
Template talk:Infobox event#English name, audio (c/f footage) and transcript.
—PC
-XT
+
06:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. The discussion was left open for long period and no clear consensus had developed on what action should be taken, and it didn't appear as if that was going to change even if it were left open for another month. I agree that there's a reasonable case for merging and keep in mind it's not a bureaucracy. Andy (or any template editor) is perfectly welcome to be bold and perform the merge themselves and see how it goes. Swarm X 03:19, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:Quotation with
Template:Quote.
Compare:
This uses Template:Quotation
This uses Template:Quote
Either make the styling switchable, or do away with it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
<code></code>
segment around a {{quote}} transclusion is really not that big of a deal as far as I can see. But if it's really absolutely necessary to keep them as separate templates, and they can't be merged to be switchable, "quotation" should at least be renamed to something like "boxquote" - there's no way for anyone to distinguish between the quote templates a priori right now, and I feel this is needlessly confusing.
{}
20:03, 22 October 2014 (UTC)This uses Template:quote box
{{quotation}}
to a projectspacey name per ais523 ({{wpquote}}
would be shorter, {{project quote}}
would work, too), and install a namespace detector that throws a big red error if it's used in mainspace. Failing that, fix technical issue and merge {{quotation}}
to {{quote}}
, per much of the above discussion, with a |box=y
parameter (that must be specified manually and is discouraged in
Template:Quote/doc), and without going through and swapping in {{quote|box=y|...}}
code on extant uses of {{quotation}}
in mainspace, just {{quote|...}}
. We usually do not need or want a box around a block quotation. Frankly, it's an excuse for editors who favor (encyclopedically inappropriate)
news style to use "billboard" call-outs and
pull quotes in our articles, which should almost never be done here. The default display should not have a box. It's definitely ridiculously confusing that {{
quote}} and {{
quotation}} go to markedly different templates; it's like having a {{cite needed}}
template that looks nothing like {{
citation needed}}
. The image-wrapping issue can be fixed by porting code (or the underlying solution in it) from one template to the other. I'm opposed to moving {{quotation}}
to a non-projectspacey name like {{boxedquote}}
or whatever, except perhaps as a stripped-down call to {{
quote|box=y|...}}
(but TfD has been showing a trend [that I do not support] toward deleting such short-hand templates of late, so I'm not sure why we'd go the other direction this time). PS:
Quotations in italics, while it still mentioned {{quotation}}
, indicated that it bollixes citation links (but did does not elaborate further; I would guess the issue has been reported to
Template talk:Quotation). Any merging of code should be very well-tested. —
SMcCandlish ☺
☏
¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼
01:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC) [substantially revised, 07:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)]
{{
Imagequote2}} apparently resolves this issue. My
recent proposal that such functionality be incorporated into {{
Quote}}, and the former then be deleted, was rejected. It has only 74 transclusions, and does not use <blockquote>
. Some days I wonder why I bother...
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
13:43, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
blockquote.templatequote.toccolours { padding:1.3em 1.5em 1.5em 1.5em;} .templatequote.toccolours div.templatequotecite { text-align:right; }
The result of the discussion was redirect to template:quote (nac). the custom parameters have been tracked in Category:Template bq using custom parameters, and anything significant has already been added to template:quote, so nothing left to merge. if anything significant pops up we can always add it to template:quote. Frietjes ( talk) 17:32, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Fork of {{ Quote}}, to which it is redundant (and much less used). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:15, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
{{
quote}}
be modified to support the additional features of {{
bq}}
? –
Jonesey95 (
talk)
13:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
style=blue
are invalid, and thus have no effect, and others, such as style=font-size:86%
may be harmful.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
14:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)style=color:Blue;
. Whether there's a case for using blue in that bit of content is matter for discussion on that page's talk page. The other example is also an argument for using a better font-size value, not a TfD matter. Anyway, my !vote on this is "merge to {{quote}}
and redirect", below. I'm simply trying to point out that you sometimes include complaints about content, about template uses in particular cases, that aren't relevant here. They're a form of
argument to emotion – look how terrible this is! the sky is falling! – and are not helpful. —
SMcCandlish ☺
☏
¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼
20:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)<blockquote>
but it should have an option to add predefined classes, language, etc., but not styles or titles or id, through a wrapper for consistent and accessible styling. The HTML5 proposed recommendation (
this version) states:There is no formal method for indicating the markup in a blockquote is from a quoted source. It is suggested that if the footer or cite elements are included and these elements are also being used within a blockquote to identify citations, the elements from the quoted source could be annotated with metadata to identify their origin, for example by using the class attribute (a defined extensibility mechanism). ( w3.org)
Here are two examples of how to use it from that proposed recommendation are:
<blockquote> <p>My favorite book is <cite class="from-source">At Swim-Two-Birds</cite></p> <footer>- <cite>Mike[tm]Smith</cite></footer> </blockquote>
and
<figure> <blockquote> <p>The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. We have a method, and that method helps us to reach not absolute truth, only asymptotic approaches to the truth — never there, just closer and closer, always finding vast new oceans of undiscovered possibilities. Cleverly designed experiments are the key.</p> </blockquote> <figcaption><cite>Carl Sagan</cite>, in "<cite>Wonder and Skepticism</cite>", from the <cite>Skeptical Enquirer</cite> Volume 19, Issue 1 (January-February 1995)</figcaption> </figure>
My point is that neither {{
Bq}} nor {{
Quote}} are rendered in a way that completely support the more current standards. {{quote|phrase|person|source}}
has the basics but does not have a language parameter which would help screen reader accessibility with pronunciation or a class parameter which would help with semantics (however they would be used – for example identifying the text as a question or as an answer). —
BoBoMisiu (
talk)
21:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
<blockquote>
element. —
BoBoMisiu (
talk)
22:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
{{Bq}}
template was written expressly to ease conversion and merging of block quotation templates (that's why it supports as many parameter names of the other templates as possible). See its documentation for the details, including a conversion guide. These features should be merged into {{Quote}}
until the templates they aid transition away from no longer exist, then those extra parameter names can be removed (optionally). —
SMcCandlish ☺
☏
¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼
18:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:31, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Most of these characters have been merged with List of Left Behind characters; by my count, only five on the list still have their own articles. Cerebellum ( talk) 16:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete, general housekeeping. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:59, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
old subpages which are no longer needed. Frietjes ( talk) 14:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was don't merge. Non-admin closure. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:52, 23 January 2015 (UTC) BTW, the nominator disputed my close at my talk page, but I declined to change my mind. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 05:16, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Propose merging Template:Infobox Cambridge college with Template:Infobox Oxford college.
Per recent TfD discussions:
-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:36, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
{{
Infobox Oxbridge college}}
. Feel free to make a counter, or additional, proposal.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
21:01, 29 November 2014 (UTC)"There have been many notes along the lines that [...] merging these two into an oxbridge template could be considered. Discussion on that proposal [...] could still be perused". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Xota FS. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:50, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:56, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2014 December 8. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:24, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:53, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:52, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted 2003 on 2014 December 8, and delete rest. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:21, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:50, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:46, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:52, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:44, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:39, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:41, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:18, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:37, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:13, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:35, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete 2001 and both 1996 squad boxes, relisting the 1999 box. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:07, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:33, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:49, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:30, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:01, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:27, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2014 December 8. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 11:04, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:21, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:36, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:20, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:40, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:19, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:28, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:13, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:27, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 10:59, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 10:57, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:11, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 10:56, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:13, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 10:36, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep for now. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:10, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant. Only 60 transclusions. Could be replaced by, merged into, or made a module of, {{ Infobox GB station}}, or even {{ Infobox station}}. Many of these stations are former mainline stations. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:52, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
|original=
|pregroup=
|postgroup=
|years=
|events=
and eight |yearsn=
|eventsn=
pairs, plus |conv=
and |metrosince=
. It could do with tidying up so that it is built around {{
infobox}}
, something along the lines of
what I did for Infobox Manchester Metrolink station. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
20:02, 18 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:03, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Propose merging all into
Template:Infobox world university ranking; perhaps rename to {{Infobox university ranking}}
; perhapas make a module of {{
Infobox University}}.
No need for separate templates.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
15:08, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was merge to a single template with no "swappable" style or content. The exact procedure is open to anyone performing the merge, but care must be taken that Twinkle doesn't break. Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 12:38, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:Welcome-anon-border with
Template:Welcome-anon.
Very similar. The bordered version has clearer language.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
18:20, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
{{{|safesubst:}}}
'd transclusion of the other template. That would prevent Twinkle from inserting garbage markup in the short term. —
This, that and
the other (talk)
02:15, 5 December 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete. While discussion on a suitable replacement for the obsolete HTML tag has somewhat overshadowed the discussion for the template, there is consensus to delete the template, and replace the current transclusions. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Used on only 28 10 articles. Content is <center>{{{1}}}</center>
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
21:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
<center>
is obsolete, {{
center}} uses proper CSS. Low use is not worthy of a redirect. By appropriate, I mean where center is useful; I have found a number of uses in tables with wikitable
class which styles to centered columns. --
Gadget850
talk
18:52, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
<center>
is obsolete", they were not referring to Wiki markup, but to the HTML tag, which
officially became obsolete three days ago (after
nearly five years of proposed obsolescence which followed
more than ten years of deprecation). It is in the sense of "out of date" that Gadget850 was using the term. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
14:13, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
<center>
was valid through HTML3, deprecated in HTML4 and now obsolete in HTML5. The {{
center}} template has been updated to use the replacement CSS. {{
Ctr}} has never been updated; it could certainly be updated, but it would then just be a copy. --
Gadget850
talk
14:39, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
{{
tl}}
, not {{
tag}}
, I suspect. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
18:45, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
{{subst:}}
? Then why hardcode the deprecated tag in articles? And in this thread I smell a "{center} covers it, mostly I guess, sometimes, basic.". (btw, the nom did not mention the obsolete aspect and did not have a replacement option at hand. Was it just usage counting?). Just mentin the (working) replacement, esp in wikitables. All those years of deprecation. -
DePiep (
talk)
18:52, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
<noinclude>{| class="wikitable"
|-
|</noinclude>style="vertical-align: middle; text-align: center; {{{style|}}}" |{{{1|}}}<noinclude>
|}
{{Documentation|Template:Table cell templates/doc}}
</noinclude>
{{Ctr}}
, whose meaning is opaque.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:39, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Template | Resulting markup | Comment |
---|---|---|
{{ Center|Some text}} in a table | <table>
<tr>
<td>
<div
class="center"
style="width:auto; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto;">
Some text
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
|
Most of the times OK. It creates a block element that might not adhere to table style. |
{{ Ctr|Some text}} – existing version | <table>
<tr>
<td>
<center>
Some text
</center>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
|
Some people here have argued correctly that <center>...</center> is deprecated and is no longer standard HTML. Is it important, especially when MediaWiki is not an epitome of using standard syntax?
|
{{ Ctr|Some text}} – Codename Lisa's proposal | <table>
<tr>
<td style="vertical-align: middle; text-align: center;">
Some text
</td>
</tr>
</table>
|
Standard, clean and within appropriate CSS scope |
<center>...</center>
tags.
—PC
-XT
+
05:45, 15 November 2014 (UTC){{Center}}
. <center>...</center>
is deprecated in
HTML5 and isn't part of wikitext. There is no reason to ask the developers to make it wikitext either. Just use the replacement css (or the other template that synthesizes it for you). I agree there isn't enough use and typing two extra "e"s isn't going to kill anyone. As for the proposed re-purposing, I don't think it adds anything beneficial to the encyclopedia. I'd rather see classes for this (assuming they don't already exist, and
Edokter might be able to expand on whether or not class="center"
or something similar might not already do what is asked for in re-purposing... — {{U|
Technical 13}} (
e •
t •
c)
22:56, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
.center
does basically do what you want, but also set width: 100%;
, which {{
center}} in turn resets to auto;
. Not the most elegant solution. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
23:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
.center
over using <center>. It's both equally bad - apart from the relatively meaningless distinction that the tag is officially obsolete in HTML5 - but it's exceedingly unlikely that any browser will stop supporting the tag any time soon. There are a couple of other options. An inline style roughly per Lisa's example (with the exception that I don't really know what the vertical-align is doing there. It is the default for td elements anyway, and if overridden in some way, there is probably a good reason as to why it is overridden). Personally, I prefer the style directly in the table rather than obfuscating it behind a template, but YMMV.example of use in different forms
| ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
.center
not semantic? It depends on context; it may have no semantic relation the the content, but it surely has a functional relation. Take .nowrap
... this is a functional class, and so is .center
. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
18:57, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
<center>
being obsolete is not about semantics; it is about the danger that it is no longer part of HTML5, which we serve. There is a real danger of browsers no longer supporting/ignoring it when rendering HTML5; I don't care what the 'chances' are. Also note that <center>
is whitelisted HTML, not wikimarkup. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
22:57, 16 November 2014 (UTC)align="center"
were replaced by one CSS style with a reduction of over 10k bytes. --
Gadget850
talk
18:48, 23 December 2014 (UTC)style="text-align:center;"
CSS, either directly or using Lisa's proposed new template.
SiBr4 (
talk)
11:17, 15 January 2015 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:03, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
The fictional universe is still developing, and once it is officially titled with more films released, this template shall be revived. Moreover, no future DC comics film (except Dawn of Justice) has yet entered production. Kailash29792 ( talk) 15:47, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2014 December 7. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete after replacing with {{ infobox food}}. If someone wants to redirect it, go ahead. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:56, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox prepared food}}, as shown in this edit - indeed, the latter template offers better data fields. Only 29 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:40, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Infobox prepared food}}
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
14:15, 17 November 2014 (UTC){{Infobox prepared food}}
; use that (or better, reverse their naming).
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
14:19, 22 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:36, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox legislature}}. Only 11 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Infobox legislature}}
seems perfectly adequate for the job; it is used, for example, on
59th Utah State Legislature. Alternatively, {{
Infobox legislative session}} exists and is used on
57th Utah State Legislature.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
10:23, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Infobox template with 120 transclusions, originally created as a fork of {{
Infobox court case}}, to which it is redundant, as demonstrated
here. A previous
discussion in April this year reached no consensus, but since then the two alternative templates have been merged at {{Infobox court case}}
. A redirect would allow the US-DC-specific name to be retained.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
19:28, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Infobox court case}}
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:26, 15 November 2014 (UTC)"...a fork of {{ Infobox court case}}, to which it is redundant, as demonstrated here". Have you reviewed the linked page? It appears to address your former concerns, fully. Your latter points appear to be around hypothetical problems with no basis in fact. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
"...a fork of {{ Infobox court case}}, to which it is redundant, as demonstrated here". Having checked that page, you will have seen that the parameters to which you refer are already present in the more generic template, If you do not discuss your apparent concerns with them, how am I or anyone else supoesed to address them? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
"...a fork of {{ Infobox court case}}, to which it is redundant, as demonstrated here". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
"All parameters from the TfD'ed template now present. My conclusion: A redirect would not malform or misrepresent any parameter (and the target template has a nicer layout using headers etc.).". You will see that the nomination links to a testcases page which shows that the nominated template is redundant to the more generic one. What would you merge? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:55, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{
Infobox criminal organization}} {{
Infobox organization}} (into which any unique and required parameters should be merged).
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
19:14, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
The parameters in {{ Infobox criminal organization}} with no equivalent in {{ Infobox organization}} are:
|named after=
|founding_location=
|years_active=
(use |formation=
& |extinction=
)|ethnicity=
|rivals=
None of these are unique to criminal organisations; all may apply to non-criminal organisations, and their totality does not justify a separate template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:45, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
|years active=
parameter would be useful in the target, as many organisations (particularly corporations) continue to exist long after they cease trading. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough, 22:36, 22 November 2014 (UTC).The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:26, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:Infobox U.S. legislation with
Template:Infobox legislation.
Redundancy.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
19:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
The claim of "redundancy" might be appropriate at the technical, template level but is woefully lacking when understanding & working with the actual content at hand.-- George Orwell III ( talk) 01:12, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Template:Infobox U.S. Legislation
is a one off call made directly to Template:Infobox
, the mother/parent of all Infoboxes. How is that redundant? What is pointless is making it a redirect to another template that is also a one off call being made directly to the same base Infobox template -- in effect making it twice removed from the parent instead of just once directly. There is no redundancy issue here that cannot be overcome with simple adjustments in categorization if anything at all. And normally I'd agree to the premise of a possible reduction in maintenance overhead if at least the css and/or inline stylings matched up -- but they don't in this case. I would think that fork alone would increase the amount wrangling needed to maintain the distinct styling for both viens in a single template never mind the difference gap in actual utilization world-wide."Merging" something like Template:Infobox UK Legislation might make far more sense to do; not only because the rendering of the two are nearly identical layout & style wise, but much of the parameters, labeling, content and their default values better align with other legislative bodies (ca, nz, au, etc.) more so than they ever would with the U.S's. I shouldn't have to be familiar with the intricacies of the majority of the world's legislative output just to be able to navigate a single one - a rather unique one at that (so much for "cognitive load"). The fact the UK one handles Wales, Scotland, Ireland and the like ultimately goes against the premise that consolidation automatically usurps "uniqueness" at the end of the day too... or somehow will increase value over the long haul as well.
Sorry. I just don't think its worth doing. -- George Orwell III ( talk) 11:48, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
In addition, I don't appreciate being 'bold texted' [well establish to be the equivalent of shouting someone down] by somebody who is suppose to be running a formal, constructive proposal. I really didn't expect the usual User talk page roustabout for simply voicing my opposition here. So without an apology first, I see no reason to comment any further either way. Good Luck. -- George Orwell III ( talk) 12:38, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
"well established..."citation needed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:09, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
|royal_assent=
? And how does it help you if the parameter list does not mention SCOTUS? As for complicated parameters - isn't that to be solved within the template? (if it's complicated for US legislature, how would it be simpler for general legislature?). This last point is for template improvement, not for throwing all bads together in one template. -
DePiep (
talk)
22:13, 17 November 2014 (UTC)|effective date=
/ |date_effective=
; |introducedby=
/ |introduced_by=
, etc.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
22:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. During the course of the discussion it was re-written as a wrapper for {{ Infobox officeholder}}. There may be consensus for merging it with {{ Infobox officeholder}}, but that template was not tagged for merging. However, feel free to renominate for merging along with another template if you still want it merged. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:51, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox officeholder}} (into which any unique parameters should be merged). Could be made a wrapper. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:24, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been rendered moot, as the template is now a wrapper for the officeholder infobox (I didn't realise Frietjes' rewrite, mentioned above, was live and not in their userspace - thanks, for that,
Frietjes). The two missing parameter, |salary=
, which may not be used, and |institutions=
are catered for by the |blank=
parameters. If they're not needed, all we need to decide is whether to keep the wrapper, or have a bot Subst: it.
See:
for tracking, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. While this was orphaned out of process, there seems a rough consensus to delete anyway. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 07:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Redundant to {{
Infobox university}} (into which the one or two unique parameters should be merged; and to which {{
Infobox university school}} already redirects). Only 10 transclusions. Orphaned
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
18:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:29, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox university}} (into which the one or two unique parameters should be merged; and to which {{ Infobox university school}} already redirects). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:17, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Infobox university school}}
already redirects to {{
Infobox university}}, which already serves for either a whole university, or a single department, through the use of its |parent=
parameter.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
21:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. There is a rough consensus to delete, and while the transclusions were removed out-of-process, now that the template isn't used anywhere the discussion about merging it is moot. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox university}}, to which {{ Infobox college}} redirects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:16, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
|telephone=
, which should not be in an infobox per
WP:NOTDIRECTORY; |ds=
(meaning "deputy superintendent"), for which, if it is not added to the more generic template, there are |head=
and |head_label=
; |alumni_website=
, which arguably also should not be present, but which could be added to the generic template if a need exists; and some style overrides which appear to be (and should be) deprecated.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
17:27, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
{{Medical school}}
- hence another possibly redundant template out there?
Montanabw
(talk)
20:45, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
|management=
, |directorate=
, |department=
, |alumni=
and |profess=
don't have equivalents in {{
infobox university}}. some could be handled by |free=
and |head=
, but there is also |vp=
and |ds=
so if you have too many of these there aren't enough free labels to handle them all.
Frietjes (
talk)
18:49, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
|directorate=
and (most likely "or") |department=
would use |parent=
. |vp=
is directly equivalent to |vice-president=
. |ds=
to |deputy_superintendent=
, now in {{
Infobox university}}.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
18:57, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
|head=
.
Frietjes (
talk)
19:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)In case anyone is still in any doubt about the redundancy of the nominated template: even before this TfD, {{ Infobox university}} was already in use on:
and many more besides; in fact, on far more medical college articles then the nominated template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:17, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was No consensus. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 07:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Used in only two articles. Content is ||style="text-align:right;{{#if:{{{1|}}}|color:#000000;background:#{{{1}}};}}"|
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
style=
attribute to style sheets is often ideal from a HTML point of view, but in order to do that, a style sheet needs the appropriate rule adding first. See my comments of 01:00, 2 November 2014 at
#Hotcold templates for why this is impractical; and as noted above, more than one class is required.
Press Freedom Index uses seven values for the parameter (98FB98, CFC, CFF, F9D, FDD, FF6, FFD}, and
Global Innovation Index uses five values (ccffcc, ccffff, ff3333, ff9900, ffffcc). Two of these are common, so ten classes would be needed to replace these uses alone. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
12:00, 6 November 2014 (UTC)style="{{paramters.map(key:value).join(';')}}"
. If the above RfC happens soon we don't even need that. But having such a discussion doesn't belong in a single TfD discussion IMO - so for the time being: keep.
Martijn Hoekstra (
talk)
09:51, 10 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete, now that changes were made to make this obsolete, and there appear to be no objections to the changes. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:48, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
No meaningful content. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:35, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
{{
Election box gain with party link}}
the |loser=
parameter is mandatory. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
18:43, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Whig gain from ? | Swing | N/A | |||
Whig gain from | Swing | N/A | |||
Whig gain from (unknown) | Swing | N/A |
{{
Election box gain with party link}}
.
Frietjes (
talk)
15:54, 30 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:53, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Used in only one article. Content is style="background: #e5e5e5"
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
|colour=silver
to activate this. "background" genericizes the name, as the content is usable for things other than lines. --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
07:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:53, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Used in only one article. Content is style="background: #eecc99"
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:35, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
|colour=bronze
to activate this. "background" genericizes the name, as the content is usable for things other than lines. --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
07:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was No consensus for proposed change. Delete arguments are probably strongest (so do fix the issues noted) but not even a solid majority. The status quo is strongly opposed so deleting the existing page. Guy ( Help!) 23:59, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Content is style="background: #EFEFEF"
. Used on 192 articles, of which 185 use a redirect from {{
Ligne grise}}, whose name will be opaque to most editors.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
style="background: #EFEFEF"
; we don't need a template for that. It is inly used in a tiny proportion of our articles.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
22:18, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
"Templates for which none of these [reasons in that section] apply may be deleted by consensus here. ". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
|colour=grey
to activate this. "background" genericizes the name, as the content is usable for things other than lines. Delete the redirect {{
ligne grise}} as it is not English, and is used to indicate a colour code, so should be English. --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
07:55, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:53, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Used in only one article. Content is style="background: #fffcaf"
.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
|colour=gold
to activate this. "background" genericizes the name, as the content is usable for things other than lines. --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
07:52, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Subst and delete. Jackmcbarn ( talk) 04:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Used in only six articles. Content is style="background-color: {{{1}}}"
. Subst: and delete.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:13, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was merge with {{ Infobox London station}} Magioladitis ( talk) 22:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to either {{ Infobox UK disused station}} or {{ Infobox London station}}, into one or other of which the small number of differing parameters should be merged. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
"into one or other of which the small number of differing parameters should be merged". In particular, there is no reason why the latter needs to only be for open stations. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:46, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Limited use (12 lines). Redundant to {{ Infobox rail line}} (see Circle line (London Underground), for example). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:01, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete as redundant to {{ Infobox station}} Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 21:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Redundant to {{ Infobox station}}. Could be made a wrapper of that, in the first instance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:55, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Parameter match and comparisons | |
---|---|
Infobox Taiwan station | Infobox station |
name | {{{native_name}}} |
name2 | NONE Sub name Chinese Redundant to "nameeng2" |
nameeng | {{{name}}} |
nameeng2 | {{{other_name}}} |
image | {{{image}}} |
imagesize | {{{image_size}}} |
caption | {{{image_caption}}} |
province municipality county city township village district |
These are all part of the address with no need to show complete structure in an article about a station |
address | {{{address}}} |
latitude | {{{latitude}}} |
longitude | {{{longitude}}} |
type | {{{structure}}} NOT {{{type}}} |
open | {{{opened}}} |
oldname | {{{former}}} |
presentname | {{{former}}} |
close | {{{closed}}} |
reopen | {{{rebuilt}}}? ADD "reopened" |
code | {{{code}}} |
lines | {{{line}}} |
wenshan neihu tucheng banqiao nangang tamsui xinbeitou xinyi xindian xiaobitan xiaonanmen songshan zhonghe xinzhuang luzhou circular northsouth wandashulin airport kmrtred kmrtorange western taichung sealine pingtung yilan northlink huadong southlink pingxi linkou neiwan jiji |
{{{line}}} and/or {{{code}}} Taiwan line names and the entry is for the station code Displays under Line(s) |
operator operator2 operator3 |
Merge in {{{operator}}} |
operatorb | Is this {{{style}}}? |
TRAlevel | Use a subtemplate |
TRAeleccode | |
TRAstartlocal | |
TRAmileage | |
bus | {{{connections}}} |
The result of the discussion was keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:49, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Limited use (five tram lines); replace with {{ Infobox rail line}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:31, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
|alt=
, or the Image module in Lua, or added microformats. Each infobox had to updated (except those we haven't yet got around to...), separately. The more infoboxes, the more work there is to do.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
22:43, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus on whether to merge or to renominate to merge and merge then. Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 10:02, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Single use, despite being created over seven years ago. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:56, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Swarm X 03:14, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Single use (and that's poor quality). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:54, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Swarm X 03:16, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Used on only 14 biographies (where it is redundant to {{ Infobox person}}) and one event (where it is redundant to {{ Infobox event}}; or possibly {{ Infobox civil conflict}}). We have, AFAICT, no other infobox which is used in this fashion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
|role=
, use |known_for=
, rewording as necessary - for example, change "Catesby's retainer" to "Acting as Catesby's retainer in the
Gunpowder Plot".
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
21:03, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
"redundant to {{ Infobox event}}; or possibly {{ Infobox civil conflict}}", in the nomination, above Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:50, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
|transcription_name=
and this discussion, so we should probably direct further comments on this to
Template talk:Infobox event#English name, audio (c/f footage) and transcript.
—PC
-XT
+
06:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. The discussion was left open for long period and no clear consensus had developed on what action should be taken, and it didn't appear as if that was going to change even if it were left open for another month. I agree that there's a reasonable case for merging and keep in mind it's not a bureaucracy. Andy (or any template editor) is perfectly welcome to be bold and perform the merge themselves and see how it goes. Swarm X 03:19, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:Quotation with
Template:Quote.
Compare:
This uses Template:Quotation
This uses Template:Quote
Either make the styling switchable, or do away with it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
<code></code>
segment around a {{quote}} transclusion is really not that big of a deal as far as I can see. But if it's really absolutely necessary to keep them as separate templates, and they can't be merged to be switchable, "quotation" should at least be renamed to something like "boxquote" - there's no way for anyone to distinguish between the quote templates a priori right now, and I feel this is needlessly confusing.
{}
20:03, 22 October 2014 (UTC)This uses Template:quote box
{{quotation}}
to a projectspacey name per ais523 ({{wpquote}}
would be shorter, {{project quote}}
would work, too), and install a namespace detector that throws a big red error if it's used in mainspace. Failing that, fix technical issue and merge {{quotation}}
to {{quote}}
, per much of the above discussion, with a |box=y
parameter (that must be specified manually and is discouraged in
Template:Quote/doc), and without going through and swapping in {{quote|box=y|...}}
code on extant uses of {{quotation}}
in mainspace, just {{quote|...}}
. We usually do not need or want a box around a block quotation. Frankly, it's an excuse for editors who favor (encyclopedically inappropriate)
news style to use "billboard" call-outs and
pull quotes in our articles, which should almost never be done here. The default display should not have a box. It's definitely ridiculously confusing that {{
quote}} and {{
quotation}} go to markedly different templates; it's like having a {{cite needed}}
template that looks nothing like {{
citation needed}}
. The image-wrapping issue can be fixed by porting code (or the underlying solution in it) from one template to the other. I'm opposed to moving {{quotation}}
to a non-projectspacey name like {{boxedquote}}
or whatever, except perhaps as a stripped-down call to {{
quote|box=y|...}}
(but TfD has been showing a trend [that I do not support] toward deleting such short-hand templates of late, so I'm not sure why we'd go the other direction this time). PS:
Quotations in italics, while it still mentioned {{quotation}}
, indicated that it bollixes citation links (but did does not elaborate further; I would guess the issue has been reported to
Template talk:Quotation). Any merging of code should be very well-tested. —
SMcCandlish ☺
☏
¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼
01:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC) [substantially revised, 07:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)]
{{
Imagequote2}} apparently resolves this issue. My
recent proposal that such functionality be incorporated into {{
Quote}}, and the former then be deleted, was rejected. It has only 74 transclusions, and does not use <blockquote>
. Some days I wonder why I bother...
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
13:43, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
blockquote.templatequote.toccolours { padding:1.3em 1.5em 1.5em 1.5em;} .templatequote.toccolours div.templatequotecite { text-align:right; }
The result of the discussion was redirect to template:quote (nac). the custom parameters have been tracked in Category:Template bq using custom parameters, and anything significant has already been added to template:quote, so nothing left to merge. if anything significant pops up we can always add it to template:quote. Frietjes ( talk) 17:32, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Fork of {{ Quote}}, to which it is redundant (and much less used). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:15, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
{{
quote}}
be modified to support the additional features of {{
bq}}
? –
Jonesey95 (
talk)
13:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
style=blue
are invalid, and thus have no effect, and others, such as style=font-size:86%
may be harmful.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
14:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)style=color:Blue;
. Whether there's a case for using blue in that bit of content is matter for discussion on that page's talk page. The other example is also an argument for using a better font-size value, not a TfD matter. Anyway, my !vote on this is "merge to {{quote}}
and redirect", below. I'm simply trying to point out that you sometimes include complaints about content, about template uses in particular cases, that aren't relevant here. They're a form of
argument to emotion – look how terrible this is! the sky is falling! – and are not helpful. —
SMcCandlish ☺
☏
¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼
20:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)<blockquote>
but it should have an option to add predefined classes, language, etc., but not styles or titles or id, through a wrapper for consistent and accessible styling. The HTML5 proposed recommendation (
this version) states:There is no formal method for indicating the markup in a blockquote is from a quoted source. It is suggested that if the footer or cite elements are included and these elements are also being used within a blockquote to identify citations, the elements from the quoted source could be annotated with metadata to identify their origin, for example by using the class attribute (a defined extensibility mechanism). ( w3.org)
Here are two examples of how to use it from that proposed recommendation are:
<blockquote> <p>My favorite book is <cite class="from-source">At Swim-Two-Birds</cite></p> <footer>- <cite>Mike[tm]Smith</cite></footer> </blockquote>
and
<figure> <blockquote> <p>The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. We have a method, and that method helps us to reach not absolute truth, only asymptotic approaches to the truth — never there, just closer and closer, always finding vast new oceans of undiscovered possibilities. Cleverly designed experiments are the key.</p> </blockquote> <figcaption><cite>Carl Sagan</cite>, in "<cite>Wonder and Skepticism</cite>", from the <cite>Skeptical Enquirer</cite> Volume 19, Issue 1 (January-February 1995)</figcaption> </figure>
My point is that neither {{
Bq}} nor {{
Quote}} are rendered in a way that completely support the more current standards. {{quote|phrase|person|source}}
has the basics but does not have a language parameter which would help screen reader accessibility with pronunciation or a class parameter which would help with semantics (however they would be used – for example identifying the text as a question or as an answer). —
BoBoMisiu (
talk)
21:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
<blockquote>
element. —
BoBoMisiu (
talk)
22:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
{{Bq}}
template was written expressly to ease conversion and merging of block quotation templates (that's why it supports as many parameter names of the other templates as possible). See its documentation for the details, including a conversion guide. These features should be merged into {{Quote}}
until the templates they aid transition away from no longer exist, then those extra parameter names can be removed (optionally). —
SMcCandlish ☺
☏
¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼
18:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:31, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Most of these characters have been merged with List of Left Behind characters; by my count, only five on the list still have their own articles. Cerebellum ( talk) 16:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete, general housekeeping. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:59, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
old subpages which are no longer needed. Frietjes ( talk) 14:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was don't merge. Non-admin closure. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 00:52, 23 January 2015 (UTC) BTW, the nominator disputed my close at my talk page, but I declined to change my mind. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 05:16, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Propose merging Template:Infobox Cambridge college with Template:Infobox Oxford college.
Per recent TfD discussions:
-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:36, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
{{
Infobox Oxbridge college}}
. Feel free to make a counter, or additional, proposal.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
21:01, 29 November 2014 (UTC)"There have been many notes along the lines that [...] merging these two into an oxbridge template could be considered. Discussion on that proposal [...] could still be perused". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Xota FS. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:50, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:56, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2014 December 8. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:24, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:53, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:52, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted 2003 on 2014 December 8, and delete rest. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:21, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:50, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:46, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:52, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:44, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:39, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:41, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:18, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:37, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:13, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:35, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete 2001 and both 1996 squad boxes, relisting the 1999 box. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:07, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:33, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:49, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:30, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:01, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:27, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2014 December 8. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 11:04, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:21, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:36, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:20, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:40, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:19, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:28, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 11:13, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:27, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 10:59, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 10:57, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:11, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 10:56, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:13, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:NENAN - fewer than five blue links excluding the parent article . Not a useful aid to navigation at the moment. Fenix down ( talk) 10:36, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep for now. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:10, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Redundant. Only 60 transclusions. Could be replaced by, merged into, or made a module of, {{ Infobox GB station}}, or even {{ Infobox station}}. Many of these stations are former mainline stations. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:52, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
|original=
|pregroup=
|postgroup=
|years=
|events=
and eight |yearsn=
|eventsn=
pairs, plus |conv=
and |metrosince=
. It could do with tidying up so that it is built around {{
infobox}}
, something along the lines of
what I did for Infobox Manchester Metrolink station. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
20:02, 18 November 2014 (UTC)The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:03, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Propose merging all into
Template:Infobox world university ranking; perhaps rename to {{Infobox university ranking}}
; perhapas make a module of {{
Infobox University}}.
No need for separate templates.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
15:08, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was merge to a single template with no "swappable" style or content. The exact procedure is open to anyone performing the merge, but care must be taken that Twinkle doesn't break. Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 12:38, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:Welcome-anon-border with
Template:Welcome-anon.
Very similar. The bordered version has clearer language.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
18:20, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
{{{|safesubst:}}}
'd transclusion of the other template. That would prevent Twinkle from inserting garbage markup in the short term. —
This, that and
the other (talk)
02:15, 5 December 2014 (UTC)