Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 September 23



Template:No3

 * 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 delete Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 01:39, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * No3

unused and yes3 has already been deleted. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 23:28, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Question: What in the world does it do? Dynamic&#124;cimanyD contact me ⁞ my edits 23:34, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It appears to do the same thing that no and no2 do, but, perhaps, with slightly different styling. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  00:04, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, too similar to no, see this. If the difference is necessary (which it isn't, since it's unused), merge into no. Dynamic&#124;cimanyD contact me ⁞ my edits 13:24, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete appears not to be necessary if it were, merge it to  as per Dynamic above.   and  should be merged too. J IM ptalk·cont 03:26, 26 September 2011 (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.

Template:Phased array antennas

 * 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 delete Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Phased array antennas

Unused and broken fork of Quantum mechanics. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:53, 23 September 2011 (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.

Template:Nanotechnology in fiction

 * 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 delete Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nanotechnology in fiction

WP:NENAN. This is basically a navbox for the sake of having a navbox: the only significant coverage of the subject is in nanotechnology in fiction. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:29, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Comment. As the person who made this navbox a number of years back, I have to say that it's not really as useful now as it was back then. There used to be three different articles on aspects of nanotechnology in fiction and popular culture, but one of them got deleted a while ago. The "notable references" block has also been prone to people adding trivial examples. I wouldn't be especially opposed to this particular navbox being removed at this point. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 17:59, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Not even a category or list would be exhaustive in its inclusions.  Nanotechnology is used in so much fiction (nowadays) that this template would be unwieldy if it was factual.Curb Chain (talk) 05:47, 25 September 2011 (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.

Template:Navigation tabs

 * 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 delete Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 01:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Navigation tabs

This is a very domain-specific styling system dating back to 2007 which is used to style two navbox templates (Dallas Neighborhoods and Downtown Oklahoma City in a way which suggests they have navigation tabs. This doesn't work as one might expect (clicking on another tab sends one to the top of the article on the relates area, rather than switching tabs), and it's inconsistent with the expected navbox layout used everywhere else in the project. Lastly, it's very similarly named to page tabs and as such is likely to cause confusion. I'm happy to rework the two navboxes in question once it's deleted. The only uses outside of those two navboxes (and the articles transcluding them obviously) are on an old bit of test code by the Astronomy WikiProject which seems to have been abandoned in favour of a hand-build solution. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:08, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to page tabs. I agree wholeheartedly with the nominator's reason. — This, that, and the other (talk)  07:08, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect to page tabs, assuming someone can change those navboxes. Dynamic&#124;cimanyD contact me ⁞ my edits 13:30, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * delete or redirect. I changed the two templates mentioned above to use either navbox or navbox with collapsible sections. Frietjes (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2011 (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.

Template:R.E. Mouscron squad

 * 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 delete Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 02:00, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * R.E. Mouscron squad

The template lists all the current football players of R.E. Mouscron, a Belgian association football team that went bankrupt in 2009. As such, the team has no players (anymore). Most of the players in the list either stopped playing football or moved to different clubs. The new team which is somewhat of a continuation (merger with R.R.C. Peruwelz) is called Royal Mouscron-Péruwelz, but it's a new team with different colors. If needed, a new template should be created for this team (but currently they play in division three, so won't happen soon...) Pelotas  talk undefined contribs  10:22, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. – PeeJay 11:19, 25 September 2011 (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.

Template:Florida Hospitals
<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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 no consensus to delete Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 02:03, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Florida Hospitals

This template is presumably intended, eventually, to include all of the hospitals in Florida, or at least all of those that will have Wikipedia articles. However, the template, which is organized by county, is already fairly large, even though it only covers 11 of the 67 counties in the state so far. Although "hospitals in Florida" might be suitable as a list, it is not a topic that would be suitable to have a (non-list) article of its own, nor do the articles about hospitals shown in this template normally link to articles about other hospitals shown in the template. Consequently, under the guideline at Categories, lists, and navigation templates, this is not a suitable template and should be deleted. Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:32, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * There is already a List of hospitals in Florida, and it is a huge (12 screens) wikitable. Maryland, Oregon and Virginia have templates of their hospitals, but they are much smaller. The intent was to provide a more concise source where a hospital could be located within a few pages, rather than scroll, scroll, scroll. Mgrē@sŏn  12:53, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * While granting that a template such as this takes up less space than the corresponding list by design, it should be noted that the List of hospitals in Florida lists about five times as many hospitals as Template:Florida Hospitals does. If Template:Florida Hospitals included all the hospitals on List of hospitals in Florida, it would probably require scrolling too. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:19, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. This template is part of the scope of the WikiProject Hospitals to create both a Hospitals (state) templates and List of hospitals in (state). Mr.Atoz (talk) 03:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * And why is that at all practical? If the navbox is made comprehensive it will be so large as to be useless. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 12:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The WikiProject Hospitals does not (yet!) specify the layout for the navbox for the "Hospitals by (State)". See the templates for the other states: Template:Hospitals in Maryland, Template:Hospitals in Oregon, Template:Hospitals in Virginia.  I would suggest the Florida version use a similar layout and thus reduce the required size.  Listing the hospitals by county is causing it to be larger than needed.  Yes, it will be larger than Virginia's because of the number of hospitals in Florida, but the template does not need to be deleted. Mr.Atoz (talk) 18:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful navigation template.  We should have more like this.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets all guidelines for inclusion of a navbox. Rather than organizing it by county (since there are so many in Florida and most other states), a better idea would be to organize it by type. Template:Hospitals in Maryland could be a good model for this. The list is not unmanageably long, and it even lists those likely to have future articles, which has led to the creation of some of those articles. Sebwite (talk) 23:22, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The template is well within the guidelines for navboxes except for the vague and uselessly worded phrases templates with a large numbers of links are not forbidden, but can appear overly busy and be hard to read and use. The guideline gives an example of a "large" template, Philosophy topics, which is considerably larger than Florida hospitals.  Reorganize the template not to be county based—which needlessly increases the visual complexity—but focus on some other natural organizing principle.  Hospitals in Oregon is arranged by hospital type:  If it were to grow any larger, we'd probably subdivide by trauma category or broad location—which side of the mountain ranges (coast, valley, eastern), though the template won't be growing much since it already lists all hospitals.  —EncMstr (talk) 17:14, 26 September 2011 (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.