The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac ( talk) 01:51, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Previous TfDs for this template: |
Delete (and subst or replace uses with
Template:Archive top red) as it's redundant and almost never used. {{
Archive top red}}, {{
Archive top green}}, and {{
Archive top yellow}} have 243, 232, and 129 transclusions respectively and the case has been made for their usefulness at
this TFD last week. {{
Archive top purple}} on the other hand has 3 transclusions in 7 years, and was even originally
forgotten from last weeks TFD. Also, the shade of purple is virtually indistinguishable from the red in {{
Archive top red}}. If anyone really wanted purple, they could use the bg=
parameter on the base {{
Archive top}} template.
The Only Zac (
talk) 22:33, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Courtesy pings: User:Purplebackpack89, User:Pigsonthewing, User:Trialpears The Only Zac ( talk) 22:33, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
bg=
param on the base {{
Archive top}} if anyone had a particular desire for them.
The Only Zac (
talk) 22:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)The result of the discussion was relisted on 2020 November 24. (non-admin closure) Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 22:58, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2020 November 29. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result of the discussion was no consensus. I see the arguments, which were numerically roughly equal, in groups. The keep group mainly argued that the sidebars have a navigational benefit. The delete group argued a mixture of two things: (a) that a sidebar shouldn't be used at all (instead a navbox at the bottom should be used); and/or (b) that these infobox-like sidebars are problematic for accessibility and mobile support reasons. Note that (b) does not address the case of an infobox (eg {{ Infobox opera}}) with a sidebar below it, hence is not sufficient for outright deletion (verses just modification).
My reading is that there is no consensus on whether there should be a sidebar. Particularly, I'd note that Nikkimaria's argument that sidebars in the lead do remain permissible was true and not refuted in the discussion. I will note that today an RfC on the matter of lead sidebars was closed discouraging their use, however their mass-removal was explicitly not authorised and a clear consensus is still required for deletion, and it is difficult to extrapolate arguments made here into an RfC close that the participants were not aware of at the time of discussion.
For a (meta-)template this widely used, with a controversial history, there should be a clearer consensus on its deletion. I suggest usage be addressed on a per-page basis in line with Robert.Allen's suggestion, or templates be nominated on per-composer basis, bundling where appropriate (eg when arguments are the same, such as 'unused'). (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 12:00, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
As well as the ~70 templates which are based on it ( see search).
Recent nominations of tens of such templates, on three dates ( September 28, October 5, October 8) resulted, without exception, in deletion.
They were nominated for:
(Some were also unused.)
The remaining templates, and the parent, are nominated on the same basis.
Arguments for keeping them which were not upheld in the previous discussions included that they were "deliberately narrower in scope to the one to which it is claimed to be redundant", that they "serve a useful navigational purpose for this set of articles", "NENAN is an essay", and "these are sidebars, not navboxes".
In each case, the image should be moved into respective articles before the template is removed.
There have previously been objections both to nominating templates of this type in batches; and to doing so individually; see Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion#Sidebar batch nominations for discussion on that point. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
his template does not display in the mobile view of Wikipedia; it is desktop only.. I've also tested a random page using {{ Composer sidebar}} and indeed it did not show. -- Gonnym ( talk) 16:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
"Recent nominations of tens of such templates, on three dates (September 28, October 5, October 8) resulted, without exception, in deletion.". This is how we determine consensus. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac ( talk) 01:51, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Previous TfDs for this template: |
Delete (and subst or replace uses with
Template:Archive top red) as it's redundant and almost never used. {{
Archive top red}}, {{
Archive top green}}, and {{
Archive top yellow}} have 243, 232, and 129 transclusions respectively and the case has been made for their usefulness at
this TFD last week. {{
Archive top purple}} on the other hand has 3 transclusions in 7 years, and was even originally
forgotten from last weeks TFD. Also, the shade of purple is virtually indistinguishable from the red in {{
Archive top red}}. If anyone really wanted purple, they could use the bg=
parameter on the base {{
Archive top}} template.
The Only Zac (
talk) 22:33, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Courtesy pings: User:Purplebackpack89, User:Pigsonthewing, User:Trialpears The Only Zac ( talk) 22:33, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
bg=
param on the base {{
Archive top}} if anyone had a particular desire for them.
The Only Zac (
talk) 22:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)The result of the discussion was relisted on 2020 November 24. (non-admin closure) Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 22:58, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2020 November 29. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result of the discussion was no consensus. I see the arguments, which were numerically roughly equal, in groups. The keep group mainly argued that the sidebars have a navigational benefit. The delete group argued a mixture of two things: (a) that a sidebar shouldn't be used at all (instead a navbox at the bottom should be used); and/or (b) that these infobox-like sidebars are problematic for accessibility and mobile support reasons. Note that (b) does not address the case of an infobox (eg {{ Infobox opera}}) with a sidebar below it, hence is not sufficient for outright deletion (verses just modification).
My reading is that there is no consensus on whether there should be a sidebar. Particularly, I'd note that Nikkimaria's argument that sidebars in the lead do remain permissible was true and not refuted in the discussion. I will note that today an RfC on the matter of lead sidebars was closed discouraging their use, however their mass-removal was explicitly not authorised and a clear consensus is still required for deletion, and it is difficult to extrapolate arguments made here into an RfC close that the participants were not aware of at the time of discussion.
For a (meta-)template this widely used, with a controversial history, there should be a clearer consensus on its deletion. I suggest usage be addressed on a per-page basis in line with Robert.Allen's suggestion, or templates be nominated on per-composer basis, bundling where appropriate (eg when arguments are the same, such as 'unused'). (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 12:00, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
As well as the ~70 templates which are based on it ( see search).
Recent nominations of tens of such templates, on three dates ( September 28, October 5, October 8) resulted, without exception, in deletion.
They were nominated for:
(Some were also unused.)
The remaining templates, and the parent, are nominated on the same basis.
Arguments for keeping them which were not upheld in the previous discussions included that they were "deliberately narrower in scope to the one to which it is claimed to be redundant", that they "serve a useful navigational purpose for this set of articles", "NENAN is an essay", and "these are sidebars, not navboxes".
In each case, the image should be moved into respective articles before the template is removed.
There have previously been objections both to nominating templates of this type in batches; and to doing so individually; see Wikipedia talk:Templates for discussion#Sidebar batch nominations for discussion on that point. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
his template does not display in the mobile view of Wikipedia; it is desktop only.. I've also tested a random page using {{ Composer sidebar}} and indeed it did not show. -- Gonnym ( talk) 16:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
"Recent nominations of tens of such templates, on three dates (September 28, October 5, October 8) resulted, without exception, in deletion.". This is how we determine consensus. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 17 November 2020 (UTC)