Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 April 25/Template:Infobox McDonald's

Template:Infobox McDonald's

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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).  No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep Erik9 (talk) 18:38, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Unnecessary use of prose in template space. Also encourages use of non-free logo outside of the main article (which is the only article it should be on). ViperSnake151 Talk  02:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  —Jeremy (blah blah) 07:02, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - this template is used to identify the main McDonald's set of articles that were split from the main article per WP:Summary style. The purpose of this information box is to including a single, uniform info box in the main McDonald's articles so that all of the articles would have an identically configured info box without any conflicting information. Please see the comments in the similar discussion for the Burger King version of this template.
 * The template is not prose but a legitimate use of Template:Infobox to create a template that has been applied to the McDonald's family of articles that cover the basic operations of the company including the history, structure and products. As to the use of the logo of the company, I think it is within the acceptable application of fair use because these articles are basically one major article in several parts (per summary style, above). Even if that is not the case, the logo portion can modified to display any image pertinent to the article in which the template is employed. --Jeremy (blah blah) 04:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep - This is normal within the broad scope of WikiProject Food and Drink and specifically WikiProject Foodservice. Further, I am completely confused about the claim of "Unnecessary use of prose in template space". I don't see any prose. I see quite a bit of information, similar to what you would find in infoboxes on hundreds of other articles (like any city or country, most large corporations, etc.). Brief, factual information belongs in infoboxes; it would be stupid to replicate that information across the entire series of McD's-related articles. The infobox is succinct, appropriate, and factual. Furthermore, it does not encourage the use of a trademarked logo on pages outside of those directly-related to McD's, because that's the only place that this infobox should appear. The "prose" issue is totally a non-issue. I can see the potential issue with the logo, but that is only a reason to alter the image that is displayed, but not to delete the entire template--especially as good and informational a template as that one is that improves the comprehension of the articles. -- Will scrlt ( →“¡¿Talk?!” ) 05:11, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Per my interpretation of NFCC 8, we can only use the McDonalds logo outside of the McDonalds article if it is critically discussed within the article. It is not in any other case. ViperSnake151 Talk  13:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok. That sounded reasonable, and it was also an easy fix. I substituted a non-trademarked default image instead of the trademarked logo, and only override the default image on the main article page and the page discussing McD's trademarks. Both of those seem directly related to the logo, thus qualifying as Fair Use.
 * Now that the trademark issue is no longer an issue, I'd appreciate it if that part of the TfD justification was removed since it is no longer applicable. And if it still seems too "prose-y", then please offer suggestions for improving it (as could have been done originally on the template's talk page instead of TfDing this useful template). I think that Jerem43 and I both are willing to adapt the template if folks agree it needs changing, but I don't think this is the right forum for that discussion. -- Will scrlt ( →“¡¿Talk?!” ) 17:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * FYI: Based on this same rationale, I updated the Infobox Burger King logo to work the same way as the McDonald's one now does (to avoid NFCC problems). The very similar Burger King template was previously TfD's (and Kept). An important point that was brought up in that TfD was:
 * …according to Infoboxes, the definition of an infobox is: An infobox on Wikipedia is a consistently-formatted table which is present in articles with a common subject. These articles all have a common subject, the corporate operations of the company  Burger King [McDonald's]. The box also conforms to the standards as defined in the Manual of Style (infoboxes): Like static infoboxes, they are designed to present summary information about an article's subject, such that similar subjects have a uniform look and in a common format. However, the template technique allows updates of style and of common text from a central place, the template page. Again, the articles all have a similar subject, different parts of the Operations of the company Burger King [McDonald's]. According to the WP documents, the box is being used exactly the way it is supposed to be, which is not spurious.
 * That certainly applies to this template, too. -- Will scrlt ( →“¡¿Talk?!” ) 17:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * "Common subject" as in, We don't use Infobox song on an article about a Super Bowl game, Super Bowl games have their own infobox. Also, Template namespace also says that "Templates should not masquerade as article content in the main article namespace; instead, place the text directly into the article." Would this count as "article content"? ViperSnake151 Talk  18:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No. These articles in fact do have a related subject - McDonald's corporation and its operations, including advertising, trademarks, products and legal issues. This infobox, like all of the uses of infobox company, is a quick summary of the facts concerning the company. --Jeremy (blah blah) 00:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Useful navigational tool.--Caspian blue 20:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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). No further edits should be made to this section.