Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 July 19



Template:RE:

 * 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 speedy deleted. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 05:49, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * RE:

Unused template / abandonned WIP from 2010. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete user left Wikipedia in 2011, this is an abandoned work in progress. At most userfy and delete the template-space redirect when it moves -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 06:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete delete as unused....William 13:03, 20 July 2013 (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:Alaska Nanooks men's ice hockey roster

 * 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 relisting on Templates for discussion/Log/2013 July 28. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 22:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Alabama–Huntsville Chargers men's ice hockey roster
 * Alaska Anchorage Seawolves men's ice hockey roster
 * Alaska Nanooks men's ice hockey roster
 * Air Force Falcons men's ice hockey roster
 * Army Black Knights men's ice hockey roster
 * Boston University Terriers men's ice hockey roster
 * Bowling Green Falcons men's ice hockey roster
 * Canisius Golden Griffins men's ice hockey roster
 * Connecticut Huskies men's ice hockey roster
 * Cornell Big Red men's ice hockey roster
 * Denver Pioneers men's ice hockey roster
 * Ferris State Bulldogs men's ice hockey roster
 * Holy Cross Crusaders men's ice hockey roster
 * Lake Superior State Lakers men's ice hockey roster
 * Michigan Wolverines men's ice hockey roster
 * Minot State Beavers men's ice hockey roster
 * Niagara Purple Eagles men's ice hockey roster
 * Notre Dame Fighting Irish men's ice hockey roster
 * Wisconsin Badgers men's ice hockey roster
 * 2009-10 Bowling Green Falcons men's ice hockey roster
 * 2009–10 RIT Tigers men's ice hockey roster
 * 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:@

 * 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 Merged with (and redirected to) No spam. Existing use of @ should not be affected, excpept in cases where the size parameter is used, which I could not detect. — Edokter  ( talk ) — 12:56, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

The use of @ as the alt text in this template defeats its very purpose. Spambots nowadays are sophisticated enough to parse the HTML, and they will parse the image as its alt text. ï¿½ (talk) 10:57, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Question. I take it you're saying the bots that trawl the internet for email addresses can read joeblogs @undefined example.com just as they can read joeblogs@example.com. Can you point me to a reliable source that confirms this in plain English? Perhaps something in a popular (but reliable) magazine? Thanks for alerting us to this. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 12:17, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I an not sure if you understood me properly. I meant to say that if screen readers can read something, than malicious bots can read it too. ï¿½ (talk) 14:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep. I didn't understand you on first reading. Thanks for clarifying. Can't we just remove the @ from the alt text? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 09:53, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * That would harm accessibility. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (Assuming the accessibility problem you see is with text→voice screen-readers) does a screen-reader read "@" as "at"? If it does, then (assuming there is a spambot problem, per your comment below this), would the spambot problem be resolved by replacing "@" with "at" in the alt text? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 12:52, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * "Can read it" != "read it". Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * agreed, even if some email-collectors are sophisticated enough to pick up on this pattern I would suspect the majority are based on simple text-parsing.--Xiaphias (talk) 21:19, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * seems redundant to no spam. Frietjes (talk) 14:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge to nospam (by making no-params output "@") -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep unless evidence that spambots actually read this template (or alt attributes in general) is provided.  Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Question: Does the template must include the Tfd-template during this discussion? I think of the possibility to irritate visitors and new users, e.g. if they want to send a mail to  --se4598 (talk) 15:22, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * comment, that actually improves the obfuscation :), however, I would say after a few days, there is no problem to move it into the  section. Frietjes (talk) 17:28, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete it is a symbol only. We can write it directly from keyboards. Banhtrung1 (talk) 06:44, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * comment: Its purpose is to prevent spam.--Xiaphias (talk) 21:19, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep whether or not spambots can parse it. If people are concerned about the alt text, couldn't we change it to AT? — PublicAmpers &#38;  (main account • talk • block) 18:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge to nospam, per 76.65.128.222. No reason to have two templates with the same purpose.--Xiaphias (talk) 21:19, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - This would be a great template to use as a shorter version of the current replyto, if it wasn't used as an anti-spam measure. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:28, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment – The template uses "@" rather than "at" as alt text for easier cutting and pasting (it doesn't matter which one is used for a screen reader user). I [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:@&diff=476934106&oldid=476801218 added the alt text] for accessibility and to put the template in line with [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:No_spam&diff=439258361&oldid=334179956 my change at Template:No spam], which was a response to this message on my talk page by Amalthea. Graham 87 04:59, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. in addition to everything else, this already appears on many (as in "more than a 1000") discussion pages, many of which are archived. although it's easy for some spambot to harvest it (e.g., by looking at the "alt" text), there is no evidence that any of them actually does so. the harm in deleting is obvious, the benefit is dubious at best. peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 21:32, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as used. It is logical in showing an at-sign for {@}, plus any updates to deter spambots seeing the "alt=" text can be discussed on the related template-talk page, but no reason to delete. -Wikid77 21:52, 26 July 2013 (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:SwimTeam

 * 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; deleted as G8 by AnomieBOT ⚡  04:03, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * SwimTeam

SwimTeam (Swim Team) doesn't have its own article, and this template links only three articles not counting those in "Related articles". 114.145.203.75 (talk) 09:47, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * delete, could probably be deleted per db-g8 as it seems to be similar to db-a9 but as a template for a band with no article. Frietjes (talk) 14:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per Frietjes....William 14:51, 20 July 2013 (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.