Template:Pro gamer achievements ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( XfD| restore)

no direct guideline-based reason for deletion. This template make it a lot easier to create pro gaming-related tables because of complicated formatting -- Prisencolin ( talk) 20:50, 18 April 2016 (UTC) reply

• I just reviewed the TfD guidelines and I agree that the reasoning for deletion doesn't seem to meet those guidelines. A template that will likely never be used again is a reason for deletion, but this sounded like a IDONTLIKEIT discussion. I'm leaning toward thinking this should have been closed as NC on the basis of numbers vs. strength of argument, but I admit I don't know TfD very well. But if this is a reasonable deletion at TfD, the guidelines need to be updated. Hobit ( talk) 04:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC) reply
  • Now that I've read more and others have educated me on relevant matters I'm at endorse deletion but userify on request though it shouldn't be transcluded in mainspace articles. Hobit ( talk) 15:57, 21 April 2016 (UTC) reply
• I closed this as delete because the "it's just a table" argument trumped the "I'm going to use it more." This was not a case of IDONTLIKEIT, but a case of "why are we using a hardcoded template when a normal table will suffice?" There are some templates that create custom headers with specific issues (and used on dozens of pages) in order to create a certain aesthetic and provide some semblance of uniformity, but in this case it was literally just a table coded into a template. The creator, upon notification of the TFD, slapped this on three articles, and (as far as I can tell) that was it. If the grand sum of all usage of this template was four pages then it makes more sense to simply add the normal table code. WikiProject Video games might have something to say about this, but they were never brought into the loop, though I have now pinged them. For their reference, the following four articles were using this template: 1, 2, 3, 4.

As a note, Czar also closed as delete (re-opening due to Prisencolin not seeing the TFD) with similar rationale. Primefac ( talk) 05:56, 19 April 2016 (UTC) reply

I guess my point is that if someone wants to use the template rather than a table (say because they find it easier to be consistant and they can update things in one place to reformat everything, but exact reasons don't matter) what is the basis for preventing them from doing that? I don't see anything at TfD that indicates such an argument is a valid reason to delete. Nor does it seem like a good IAR case as it isn't clear that deleting this does anything other than piss off someone. Hobit ( talk) 15:28, 19 April 2016 (UTC) reply

Well TfD does have the rather big catch all statement in the "Reasons to delete a template" section , "Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here." Which I guess there is a matter of perspective on, it's either a massive catch all as I presented which should be nailed down a bit, or it's a natural(ish) view of templates. Templates are here to assist in the bebuilding process, and so it does ultimately tend to come down to a subjective view as to if it is of genuine value in the process or not. What one person sees as a beautiful slick way of doing something others can easily see as a confusing, inconsistent etc. -- 82.14.37.32 ( talk) 20:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC) reply

• Deletion review's remit is not unconstrained. We review here whether the person closing a deletion discussion has correctly followed the process to do so and implemented the consensus at that discussion. Everything here happened in accordance with process, and therefore I endorse the outcome. Stifle ( talk) 08:15, 19 April 2016 (UTC) reply
• Other: The outcomes being sought here are not mutually exclusive. This is one of those happy cases where it's possible to please everyone, so let's do that. The DRV closer could leave the TfD result undisturbed, but restore the template's content to a separate subpage of Prisencolin's userspace. Prisencolin can then transclude it from userspace instead of from the template namespace (as described in Help:Template), so he can facilitate the creation of his articles about pro gamer achievements in exactly the way he wants without any fuss at all.— S Marshall T/ C 17:02, 19 April 2016 (UTC) reply
  • I'm not a template person so forgive the stupid question, but how would that work? Would the userspace template be included in mainspace? Or is there something else you are proposing? Hobit ( talk) 20:56, 20 April 2016 (UTC) reply
    • Not strictly included. Could be transcluded or substituted (either works; which would apply depends on how the original was set up and I can't see it). It's easy to set up your own personal templates in userspace. The difference in practice, as far as Prisencolin is concerned, is that (if transcluded) instead of typing {{Pro gamer achievements}} he would type {{User:Prisencolin/Pro gamer achievements}} ---- or (if substituted) instead of typing {{subst:Pro gamer achievements}} he would type {{subst:User:Prisencolin/Pro gamer achievements}}. Only practical difference is a few more keystrokes for him, or he could even save that by copy/pasting the text I've just typed out.

      It's so easy, Hobit, you've already accidentally done it. You've used exactly this technique on your userpage. You know how you've got {{User:Scepia/BGG}} there which creates one of your userboxes? That's actually a userspace template transclusion of the kind I'm suggesting.— S Marshall T/ C 00:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC) reply

      • Sorry, my question was unclear. It sounds like you are suggesting that a mainspace article use a user template. Is that actually standard? The help page you linked to says user space templates are for "your own personal use or for experimentation". Seems odd that we've even have TfD if that's allowed. So I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding your proposal or misunderstanding how things are generally done or something else. Thanks! Hobit ( talk) 04:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC) reply
        • @ Hobit: You're correct, that would be highly nonstandard. Substituting from a userspace template is perfectly fine; it's just a shortcut to get the wikitable code onto the page without writing it yourself every time. Transcluding a userspace template in the mainspace shouldn't be done, though. ~ Rob ^Talk 06:04, 21 April 2016 (UTC) reply
          • I imagine that's a non-concern in this case. It was probably a substituting template from the outset, given its purpose.— S Marshall T/ C 07:33, 21 April 2016 (UTC) reply
• Endorse close. Numerically, it's clear that the closure is supported. Strength of arguments is being questioned above, but see reason #2 for deletion. While wiki-tables aren't actually a template, the spirit in which that reason for deletion was written is fairly clear. This template is obviously redundant to wikitables. See Wikipedia:Avoid template creep for reasons why redundancy is bad. Weak support/indifference toward S Marshall's proposal. I have no problem with this being restored to userspace with the understanding that it will be speedily deleted per the TfD outcome if it's placed back into template space. ~ Rob ^Talk 19:46, 20 April 2016 (UTC) reply
  • I'd like to clarify that I support the restoration to a userspace template on the condition that the template is used for substitutions only, to make it easier to add the wikitable to articles. I strongly oppose transcluding userspace templates in the mainspace. ~ Rob ^Talk 06:04, 21 April 2016 (UTC) reply
• Endorse close, no objection to userfying. Disclosure: I deleted this. (Surely asking for that would have been easier than starting a DRV about a discussion from six weeks ago?) Opabinia regalis ( talk) 20:01, 20 April 2016 (UTC) reply

I dont fully understand how transclusion works yet, but if userspace templated are effectively going to be used on mainspace, why exactly can't we just have this on normal template space if not for the TfD concensus?-- Prisencolin ( talk) 15:33, 22 April 2016 (UTC) reply

• If not for consensus, we could do a lot of things! The template namespace is for templates that contribute to the project. We tend to want to reduce redundancy within the template space because it makes it a lot easier to maintain. In this case, the template is completely redundant to a wikitable and not of much use. If a single person wants to use it for substitution (and take on the role of maintaining it if wikitables ever change or the needs of the template change), then they should be able to do so, but putting the template in the template space and transcluding it in articles requires other editors to maintain it to avoid breaking articles. ~ Rob ^Talk 15:47, 22 April 2016 (UTC) reply

• Transclusion copies content from a source page to a target page such that if the source page changes, so does the target page. Substitution copies content from a source page to a target page such that if the source page changes, the target page does not. If you look at my edit history, the two edits immediately preceding this one show how you can use substitution, from your userspace, to preload a wikitable into your target page.— S Marshall T/ C 19:49, 22 April 2016 (UTC) reply

For future reference, those two edits are 1) creating the table and 2) substituting /sandbox into /sandbox2. Primefac ( talk) 20:13, 22 April 2016 (UTC) reply

• Userfy and allow recreation, per deleting admin, I think we can respect this decision. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 17:28, 25 April 2016 (UTC) reply