The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was Keep. There is widespread agreement that this is a
WP:TRAINWRECK. There is also some agreement among commenters that it might be best if nom takes a break from TfD to gain valuable experience elsewhere.
HouseBlastertalk 17:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC) (
non-admin closure)reply
The templates display content, which is usually best optimised to suit the article in which it is displayed, which is not usually possible with a template.
Whether such templates are appropriate in a GA or FA class article is irrelevant.
In a
similar debate: templates in this series were deleted if they were only used once but those that were added to geography and demography articles were not. Could the reason they were deleted be to keep the source code of the articles reasonably clean and simple? Several tables and graphs are transcluded into COVID articles and therefore, this is a precedent which has been used in high visibility pages and some, at least, are quite complicated and used several times. Keeping such templates for this reason doesn't impact the problems with the templates though.
The content of the tables should be referenced in the same way as any other data set. It appears that some of the templates have references and display the reference in the destination page but others do not. The content only displays a small set of communities/cities. Why not just link to the "list of cities ..." articles instead so that all the communities/cities are displayed with the most accurate references and data? Why are we making decisions on how many cities/communities to include on the country page instead of the "list of cities ..." articles?
The current design only allows for the population and the subdivision in which the city is located. Depending on the laws of the country, a city can be very sparsely populated and be as large as a small country. For example, the
Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo is a very large area with many communities governed by one government. The other case is where a city is densely populated and subdivisions have its own government such as the
Boroughs of New York City. It is very misleading to capture and compare cities across a country when definitions differ across subdivisions. Subdivisions and the
United Nations have their own definitions too.
Ithasbeen stated that these templates are useful but that is simply a matter of opinion.
The templates are very limiting in what they can display with regard to city metrics. Some example metrics are area,
GDP,
GNP, and
Purchasing power parity. The templates aren't expandable to include all the metrics that are relevant nor does it make any sense to include a large number of metrics. Even an additional metric of area would seem pretty basic and following on that, definitely, population density. Demographics is very detailed and the templates for the cities are not suitable in those articles nor for the geography articles. Geographics and geography is about human geography. Cities include
infrastructure and
politics. These templates are not suitable for demography because there are too many metrics to include. Specifically: any population related data and/or information including population, sex, age, religion, race, ethnicity,
etc. should be split off to demographics articles, such as
demographics of Maldives,
demographics of China, etc.. Any city related data and/or information should be split off to "list of cities in ..." articles such as
List of cities in China and
List of cities and towns in Bulgaria. If any ==Largest cities== sections should remain, they should be renamed to ==Urbanization==. A link to the "list of cities in ..." article can be
left.
solutions that won't work:
It has also been suggested that other transclusion options such as {{
Excerpt}} and {{
Section}} which can take an excerpt or section from one article and display it in another be used however there needs to be consistency between the source articles for this to work since the templates are part of a set or series.
Reasons they won't work:
Only a limited set of metrics can be displayed.
The "list of city" articles have to be consistent in order for {{
section}} and/or {{
excerpt}} to make useful and consistent content. Transclusion should be used where the same content should be used in several places. An example is the lead for a group of sub-glossaries where the content is too much for a single page but the topic is identical. Transclusion is a tool and like any other tool there are times when it works well and times where it should not be used and times where it is good enough until something better comes up. Sometimes it is not obvious which applies. In the case of these templates, it isn't good enough. Something to consider is if it is
WP:undue weight on population and subdivisions.
solutions:
Main and see also hatnote links imply a summary style section in the article from which the main and see also articles are to be linked. This is often the same sort of information that would be in the lead of the main article. When there is also a see also article it can become more complicated. However, countries that have no cities are generally island countries or
microstates such as
andorra,
san marino, and
monaco. If a country does not have a list article that discusses cities, it may be created or if it already exists, the content on that list article can be modified or expanded. That fact that this series of templates is problematic and no solution can be devised to solve the problem is a problem with the series of templates and not a problem with other articles. In the case of
Bulgaria,
List of cities and towns in Bulgaria is linked as "
Sofia is the nation's capital and
largest city; other major cities are
Plovdiv,
Varna and
Burgas." as the last sentence in the first paragraph of the article. There isn't yet any guidance on how, which, or if city lists should be linked however
main and see also are suggestions.
some points to note:
countries are not cities
cities are in countries
countries distribute federal funding as tax to cities
cities are taxed by countries
Iterresise (
talk) 14:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
WP:APPNOTE "Editors who have made substantial edits to the topic or article. Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic. Moxy- 22:35, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep. The nominator appears to be arguing that these templates don't display every city or every metric someone may wish to know about these cities... but that's not what they're for. They accomplish what they're meant to do, which is provide a list of largest cities and their populations; that information can be supplemented or not as needed for the articles in which the templates appear. No valid rationale for deletion has been provided.
Nikkimaria (
talk) 22:16, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Invalid argument: Her argument is based on her opinion that the current kind and number of metrics is optimal. Therefore, her argument can be categorized as
WP:ILIKEIT.
Iterresise (
talk) 09:42, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Her argument is not redundant, it is perfectly valid, and it does not fall under
WP:ILIKEIT... no offense but you have a severe misunderstanding of Wikipedia policy and guidelines. The purpose of the templates are to list the largest cities or metropolitian areas in a given country, not every single statistic or metric relating to them, and they have existed for a long time. Also, I've gone and checked every single previous TFD you linked; the vast majority of them were either kept, withdrawn, or had their history merged with another template due to duplication, with only two deleted. They are clearly useful and do not fail any current Wikipedia standard or policy. -
Evelyn Harthbrooke (
leave a message ·
contributions) 10:50, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Except consensus isn't changing here, and nobody is applying
WP:ITSUSEFUL to anything. You're the only one who is disagreeing with the templates' existence. Please stop making up false policy violations. -
Evelyn Harthbrooke (
leave a message ·
contributions) 01:27, 31 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep per common usage and the fact that templates are used to condense information down and separate it from the rest of the articles in question. These templates serve their purpose and they serve them well. They are intended to list the largest cities and metropolitian areas by population, and to be quite frank this is a redundant and unnecessary TfD request. These templates are useful, and deleting these will remove useful information from dozens of articles. Also, what the hell do any of your comments in your "some points to note" have to do with the templates? Obviously cities are not countries and cities are in countries, but these templates literally list the largest metropolitian areas and cities in a given country. I can tell that this request is already not going to succeed; this TFD request is honestly astoundingly ridiculous. Also I find it shocking how someone, despite all the previous TFDs resulting in keep, withdrawal, or histmerge results, deciding to file yet another TFD despite consensus having been reached lots of times to keep these kinds of templates. :/ -
Evelyn Harthbrooke (
leave a message ·
contributions) 10:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure if you read anything I nominated. Unfortunate and a shame.
Iterresise (
talk) 12:14, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep - this is, quite frankly, a
WP:TRAINWRECK based on misinterpretation of policy, no need to run the full 7 days. Satellizer el Bridget(Talk) 11:01, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
And how would you propose to bundle the templates?
Iterresise (
talk) 12:09, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Easy, I propose that these perfectly useful templates not be deleted. Also, quit
WP:BLUDGEONing the discussion participants. Satellizer el Bridget(Talk) 14:19, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
You are being ridiculous.
Iterresise (
talk) 06:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep per
User:Nikkimaria, and per the nom's statement The templates aren't expandable to include all the metrics that are relevant nor does it make any sense to include a large number of metrics. This seems to be arguing that since the templates are unable to do something they shouldn't do anyway, they're somehow problematic. The "problems" listed seem to be matters of personal preference. Why are we making decisions on how many cities/communities to include on the country page instead of the 'list of cities ...' articles? Because encyclopaedists summarise.
Folly Mox (
talk) 08:09, 1 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Another ridiculous keep vote.
Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_November_28#Largest_cities_of is very revealing here. Some suggestions were to substitute and then delete. Deletion is preferred because substituting only takes the table out of template space and starts the cycle of a table with out a template within this series/set-of-templates. "This series of templates has slowly been created and added to various country articles as they are seen on one page and so created just so the other country page also has one" stated User:Chipmunkdavis in
Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 28#Largest cities of. "because encyclopaedists summarise" has nothing to do with this. There isn't any guidance [policy/guideline] which forbids these tables but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be created such as
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Polities and within it writing "Do not add tables which show a truncated set of cities and do not create templates with these sorts of tables.".
Iterresise (
talk) 07:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Largest cities of templates were related to
Template:World topic a nav aid and is not the same thing. Moxy- 12:16, 3 September 2023 (UTC)reply
One is a nav aid the other displays a data set. Moxy- 18:32, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
User:Iterresise, your MOS link is red, and the only place the string "truncated set of cities" appears anywhere on the project is in your comment just above. Can you please link the actual MOS guidance you're remembering, so people can see whether it might apply to this series of templates?
Folly Mox (
talk) 17:40, 3 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Read the comment I replied to moxy.
Iterresise (
talk) 18:03, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
None of your replies to User:Moxy in this conversation contains a valid MOS link.
Folly Mox (
talk) 19:49, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment I understand the nomination can be confusing but let me highlight what I wrote: "It is very misleading to capture and compare cities across a country when definitions differ across subdivisions. Subdivisions and the United Nations have their own definitions too."
Iterresise (
talk) 18:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
These are based on census data per country. Moxy- 18:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Aslo be aware that things of
this nature may get you blocked. pls review
WP:AVOIDYOU. Moxy- 18:38, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Behaviour at this TfD has been raised as a concern here:
Keep - too many templates in the TfD bundle. Too much bludgeoning. Deleting so many would disrupt too many articles.
I suggest the nominator take a break from TfDs for now. Their passion, determination and attention to detail can be more useful in some other, less contentious cleanup areas. Less frustrating for the nominator in particular.
Keep – Adding to the reasons already given, keeping template and table data in separate files—especially when the contents are well defined and not subject to the sort of discussion that, say, an infobox is—seems a valid way of preventing disruption by protecting their markup from clumsy, or even vandalistic, editing on the main page, even if the data apply to only one article.
Dhtwiki (
talk) 00:32, 6 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was merge to
Template:Infobox character. The rationales basically point to full deletion in lieu of infobox character.
Izno (
talk) 15:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Week keep – The infobox does have many parameters that are specific to Transformers characters — even though they're mostly fancruft.
InfiniteNexus (
talk) 15:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Those parameters will not interest the vast majority of readers.
Grandmaster Huon (
talk) 21:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge; extra features included in Transformers are fancruft that are not essential to an infobox. Infobox character covers the essentials needed for these characters. –
Meena • 21:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak merge as it has lots of helpful Transformers-specific information, but said information can be provided using the blank rows in {{
Infobox character}}. —theMainLogan (t•c) 21:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Transformers-specific information = Fancruft
Grandmaster Huon (
talk) 22:31, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong keep – As someone who is not part of the Wikipedia Transformers community/does not watch Transformers, I understand that it may be seen as fancruft. However, some of the parameters, such as the English and Japanese voice actors and the Japan name – are real world info sections and would clutter the infobox character if used (e.g. in voiced by it'd "X (Japan version), Y (English version)" etc). Additionally, the extra parameters help with navigating the article and help prevent it from being added by IPs etc in the storyline section. I think a discussion about the specific parameters (e.g. removing or adjusting certain ones) would be more beneficial rather than a merge.
DaniloDaysOfOurLives (
talk) 23:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Voice acting is present at
Template:Infobox character. Also, Transformers is obviously not the only anime with both Japanese and English versions.
Gonnym (
talk) 23:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I never said it wasn't. I said that combining it would make it more cluttering as you'd have to put in brackets whether it's English or Japanese. Also, I never said that Transformers is the only anime with Japanese and English versions, I know it was not intentional but please don't say that I've said stuff when I have not!
DaniloDaysOfOurLives (
talk) 00:00, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Then if you didn't argue that those parameters were unique to that franchise, what was your argument? Did you just mention those parameters for the sake of mentioning them?
Gonnym (
talk) 08:28, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete Infobox Transformers character per nomination. This is basically just Infobox character but with additional unneeded fancruft parameters. Satellizer el Bridget(Talk) 02:16, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Additional comment this is a deletion request for Infobox Transformers character, not an actual merger request. I'd suggest changing this so there isn't a misleading TfD notice on Infobox character for no reason especially when that infobox is used across 7,600+ pages (I've requested it be removed anyway). Satellizer el Bridget(Talk) 02:30, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
This is not correct. TfDs are used for deletion or merging; this nomination is correctly tagged as a merge request.
InfiniteNexus (
talk) 00:47, 31 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge All features of this template are either fancruft or possible at Infobox Character.
QuicoleJR (
talk) 14:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 11:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 07:15, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 06:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete Unused template that is no longer needed.
QuicoleJR (
talk) 14:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 06:46, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete both: per nom and practically unused in the article/main namespace. No need to differentiate between interurban and urban lines as they're branded as one cohesive unit to the public.
Fork99 (
talk) 07:11, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 06:45, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Unused and will be unused for 2 years. If the creator wants it then move it to their userpace, otherwise delete.
Gonnym (
talk) 06:38, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 03:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was Keep. There is widespread agreement that this is a
WP:TRAINWRECK. There is also some agreement among commenters that it might be best if nom takes a break from TfD to gain valuable experience elsewhere.
HouseBlastertalk 17:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC) (
non-admin closure)reply
The templates display content, which is usually best optimised to suit the article in which it is displayed, which is not usually possible with a template.
Whether such templates are appropriate in a GA or FA class article is irrelevant.
In a
similar debate: templates in this series were deleted if they were only used once but those that were added to geography and demography articles were not. Could the reason they were deleted be to keep the source code of the articles reasonably clean and simple? Several tables and graphs are transcluded into COVID articles and therefore, this is a precedent which has been used in high visibility pages and some, at least, are quite complicated and used several times. Keeping such templates for this reason doesn't impact the problems with the templates though.
The content of the tables should be referenced in the same way as any other data set. It appears that some of the templates have references and display the reference in the destination page but others do not. The content only displays a small set of communities/cities. Why not just link to the "list of cities ..." articles instead so that all the communities/cities are displayed with the most accurate references and data? Why are we making decisions on how many cities/communities to include on the country page instead of the "list of cities ..." articles?
The current design only allows for the population and the subdivision in which the city is located. Depending on the laws of the country, a city can be very sparsely populated and be as large as a small country. For example, the
Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo is a very large area with many communities governed by one government. The other case is where a city is densely populated and subdivisions have its own government such as the
Boroughs of New York City. It is very misleading to capture and compare cities across a country when definitions differ across subdivisions. Subdivisions and the
United Nations have their own definitions too.
Ithasbeen stated that these templates are useful but that is simply a matter of opinion.
The templates are very limiting in what they can display with regard to city metrics. Some example metrics are area,
GDP,
GNP, and
Purchasing power parity. The templates aren't expandable to include all the metrics that are relevant nor does it make any sense to include a large number of metrics. Even an additional metric of area would seem pretty basic and following on that, definitely, population density. Demographics is very detailed and the templates for the cities are not suitable in those articles nor for the geography articles. Geographics and geography is about human geography. Cities include
infrastructure and
politics. These templates are not suitable for demography because there are too many metrics to include. Specifically: any population related data and/or information including population, sex, age, religion, race, ethnicity,
etc. should be split off to demographics articles, such as
demographics of Maldives,
demographics of China, etc.. Any city related data and/or information should be split off to "list of cities in ..." articles such as
List of cities in China and
List of cities and towns in Bulgaria. If any ==Largest cities== sections should remain, they should be renamed to ==Urbanization==. A link to the "list of cities in ..." article can be
left.
solutions that won't work:
It has also been suggested that other transclusion options such as {{
Excerpt}} and {{
Section}} which can take an excerpt or section from one article and display it in another be used however there needs to be consistency between the source articles for this to work since the templates are part of a set or series.
Reasons they won't work:
Only a limited set of metrics can be displayed.
The "list of city" articles have to be consistent in order for {{
section}} and/or {{
excerpt}} to make useful and consistent content. Transclusion should be used where the same content should be used in several places. An example is the lead for a group of sub-glossaries where the content is too much for a single page but the topic is identical. Transclusion is a tool and like any other tool there are times when it works well and times where it should not be used and times where it is good enough until something better comes up. Sometimes it is not obvious which applies. In the case of these templates, it isn't good enough. Something to consider is if it is
WP:undue weight on population and subdivisions.
solutions:
Main and see also hatnote links imply a summary style section in the article from which the main and see also articles are to be linked. This is often the same sort of information that would be in the lead of the main article. When there is also a see also article it can become more complicated. However, countries that have no cities are generally island countries or
microstates such as
andorra,
san marino, and
monaco. If a country does not have a list article that discusses cities, it may be created or if it already exists, the content on that list article can be modified or expanded. That fact that this series of templates is problematic and no solution can be devised to solve the problem is a problem with the series of templates and not a problem with other articles. In the case of
Bulgaria,
List of cities and towns in Bulgaria is linked as "
Sofia is the nation's capital and
largest city; other major cities are
Plovdiv,
Varna and
Burgas." as the last sentence in the first paragraph of the article. There isn't yet any guidance on how, which, or if city lists should be linked however
main and see also are suggestions.
some points to note:
countries are not cities
cities are in countries
countries distribute federal funding as tax to cities
cities are taxed by countries
Iterresise (
talk) 14:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
WP:APPNOTE "Editors who have made substantial edits to the topic or article. Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic. Moxy- 22:35, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep. The nominator appears to be arguing that these templates don't display every city or every metric someone may wish to know about these cities... but that's not what they're for. They accomplish what they're meant to do, which is provide a list of largest cities and their populations; that information can be supplemented or not as needed for the articles in which the templates appear. No valid rationale for deletion has been provided.
Nikkimaria (
talk) 22:16, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Invalid argument: Her argument is based on her opinion that the current kind and number of metrics is optimal. Therefore, her argument can be categorized as
WP:ILIKEIT.
Iterresise (
talk) 09:42, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Her argument is not redundant, it is perfectly valid, and it does not fall under
WP:ILIKEIT... no offense but you have a severe misunderstanding of Wikipedia policy and guidelines. The purpose of the templates are to list the largest cities or metropolitian areas in a given country, not every single statistic or metric relating to them, and they have existed for a long time. Also, I've gone and checked every single previous TFD you linked; the vast majority of them were either kept, withdrawn, or had their history merged with another template due to duplication, with only two deleted. They are clearly useful and do not fail any current Wikipedia standard or policy. -
Evelyn Harthbrooke (
leave a message ·
contributions) 10:50, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Except consensus isn't changing here, and nobody is applying
WP:ITSUSEFUL to anything. You're the only one who is disagreeing with the templates' existence. Please stop making up false policy violations. -
Evelyn Harthbrooke (
leave a message ·
contributions) 01:27, 31 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep per common usage and the fact that templates are used to condense information down and separate it from the rest of the articles in question. These templates serve their purpose and they serve them well. They are intended to list the largest cities and metropolitian areas by population, and to be quite frank this is a redundant and unnecessary TfD request. These templates are useful, and deleting these will remove useful information from dozens of articles. Also, what the hell do any of your comments in your "some points to note" have to do with the templates? Obviously cities are not countries and cities are in countries, but these templates literally list the largest metropolitian areas and cities in a given country. I can tell that this request is already not going to succeed; this TFD request is honestly astoundingly ridiculous. Also I find it shocking how someone, despite all the previous TFDs resulting in keep, withdrawal, or histmerge results, deciding to file yet another TFD despite consensus having been reached lots of times to keep these kinds of templates. :/ -
Evelyn Harthbrooke (
leave a message ·
contributions) 10:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure if you read anything I nominated. Unfortunate and a shame.
Iterresise (
talk) 12:14, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep - this is, quite frankly, a
WP:TRAINWRECK based on misinterpretation of policy, no need to run the full 7 days. Satellizer el Bridget(Talk) 11:01, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
And how would you propose to bundle the templates?
Iterresise (
talk) 12:09, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Easy, I propose that these perfectly useful templates not be deleted. Also, quit
WP:BLUDGEONing the discussion participants. Satellizer el Bridget(Talk) 14:19, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
You are being ridiculous.
Iterresise (
talk) 06:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep per
User:Nikkimaria, and per the nom's statement The templates aren't expandable to include all the metrics that are relevant nor does it make any sense to include a large number of metrics. This seems to be arguing that since the templates are unable to do something they shouldn't do anyway, they're somehow problematic. The "problems" listed seem to be matters of personal preference. Why are we making decisions on how many cities/communities to include on the country page instead of the 'list of cities ...' articles? Because encyclopaedists summarise.
Folly Mox (
talk) 08:09, 1 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Another ridiculous keep vote.
Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_November_28#Largest_cities_of is very revealing here. Some suggestions were to substitute and then delete. Deletion is preferred because substituting only takes the table out of template space and starts the cycle of a table with out a template within this series/set-of-templates. "This series of templates has slowly been created and added to various country articles as they are seen on one page and so created just so the other country page also has one" stated User:Chipmunkdavis in
Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 28#Largest cities of. "because encyclopaedists summarise" has nothing to do with this. There isn't any guidance [policy/guideline] which forbids these tables but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be created such as
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Polities and within it writing "Do not add tables which show a truncated set of cities and do not create templates with these sorts of tables.".
Iterresise (
talk) 07:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Largest cities of templates were related to
Template:World topic a nav aid and is not the same thing. Moxy- 12:16, 3 September 2023 (UTC)reply
One is a nav aid the other displays a data set. Moxy- 18:32, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
User:Iterresise, your MOS link is red, and the only place the string "truncated set of cities" appears anywhere on the project is in your comment just above. Can you please link the actual MOS guidance you're remembering, so people can see whether it might apply to this series of templates?
Folly Mox (
talk) 17:40, 3 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Read the comment I replied to moxy.
Iterresise (
talk) 18:03, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
None of your replies to User:Moxy in this conversation contains a valid MOS link.
Folly Mox (
talk) 19:49, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment I understand the nomination can be confusing but let me highlight what I wrote: "It is very misleading to capture and compare cities across a country when definitions differ across subdivisions. Subdivisions and the United Nations have their own definitions too."
Iterresise (
talk) 18:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
These are based on census data per country. Moxy- 18:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Aslo be aware that things of
this nature may get you blocked. pls review
WP:AVOIDYOU. Moxy- 18:38, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Behaviour at this TfD has been raised as a concern here:
Keep - too many templates in the TfD bundle. Too much bludgeoning. Deleting so many would disrupt too many articles.
I suggest the nominator take a break from TfDs for now. Their passion, determination and attention to detail can be more useful in some other, less contentious cleanup areas. Less frustrating for the nominator in particular.
Keep – Adding to the reasons already given, keeping template and table data in separate files—especially when the contents are well defined and not subject to the sort of discussion that, say, an infobox is—seems a valid way of preventing disruption by protecting their markup from clumsy, or even vandalistic, editing on the main page, even if the data apply to only one article.
Dhtwiki (
talk) 00:32, 6 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was merge to
Template:Infobox character. The rationales basically point to full deletion in lieu of infobox character.
Izno (
talk) 15:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Week keep – The infobox does have many parameters that are specific to Transformers characters — even though they're mostly fancruft.
InfiniteNexus (
talk) 15:58, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Those parameters will not interest the vast majority of readers.
Grandmaster Huon (
talk) 21:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge; extra features included in Transformers are fancruft that are not essential to an infobox. Infobox character covers the essentials needed for these characters. –
Meena • 21:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak merge as it has lots of helpful Transformers-specific information, but said information can be provided using the blank rows in {{
Infobox character}}. —theMainLogan (t•c) 21:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Transformers-specific information = Fancruft
Grandmaster Huon (
talk) 22:31, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong keep – As someone who is not part of the Wikipedia Transformers community/does not watch Transformers, I understand that it may be seen as fancruft. However, some of the parameters, such as the English and Japanese voice actors and the Japan name – are real world info sections and would clutter the infobox character if used (e.g. in voiced by it'd "X (Japan version), Y (English version)" etc). Additionally, the extra parameters help with navigating the article and help prevent it from being added by IPs etc in the storyline section. I think a discussion about the specific parameters (e.g. removing or adjusting certain ones) would be more beneficial rather than a merge.
DaniloDaysOfOurLives (
talk) 23:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Voice acting is present at
Template:Infobox character. Also, Transformers is obviously not the only anime with both Japanese and English versions.
Gonnym (
talk) 23:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I never said it wasn't. I said that combining it would make it more cluttering as you'd have to put in brackets whether it's English or Japanese. Also, I never said that Transformers is the only anime with Japanese and English versions, I know it was not intentional but please don't say that I've said stuff when I have not!
DaniloDaysOfOurLives (
talk) 00:00, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Then if you didn't argue that those parameters were unique to that franchise, what was your argument? Did you just mention those parameters for the sake of mentioning them?
Gonnym (
talk) 08:28, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete Infobox Transformers character per nomination. This is basically just Infobox character but with additional unneeded fancruft parameters. Satellizer el Bridget(Talk) 02:16, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Additional comment this is a deletion request for Infobox Transformers character, not an actual merger request. I'd suggest changing this so there isn't a misleading TfD notice on Infobox character for no reason especially when that infobox is used across 7,600+ pages (I've requested it be removed anyway). Satellizer el Bridget(Talk) 02:30, 30 August 2023 (UTC)reply
This is not correct. TfDs are used for deletion or merging; this nomination is correctly tagged as a merge request.
InfiniteNexus (
talk) 00:47, 31 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Merge All features of this template are either fancruft or possible at Infobox Character.
QuicoleJR (
talk) 14:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 11:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 07:15, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 06:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete Unused template that is no longer needed.
QuicoleJR (
talk) 14:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 06:46, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete both: per nom and practically unused in the article/main namespace. No need to differentiate between interurban and urban lines as they're branded as one cohesive unit to the public.
Fork99 (
talk) 07:11, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 06:45, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
Unused and will be unused for 2 years. If the creator wants it then move it to their userpace, otherwise delete.
Gonnym (
talk) 06:38, 29 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The result of the discussion was delete.
✗plicit 03:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.