Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 September 23



Template:Toronto mayoral election, 2014 candidates

 * 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) 21:10, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Toronto mayoral election, 2014 candidates

Navbox template which was originally created to link five "Candidate mayoral campaign, 2014" spinoffs about the five "major candidate" campaigns in the Toronto mayoral election, 2014 as separate articles from the BLPs about the candidates themselves — three all five of which have now been deleted at AFD as unwarranted content forks. (and the other two are up for deletion and have a clear consensus to delete as soon as the AFD is closable, which it will be within hours.) The deleted articles have since been replaced with direct links to the BLPs themselves, but this template would not be appropriate for direct inclusion on those articles, since navboxes of this type are not normally created for municipal elections. All of which means that the template's only remaining use will be at the bottom of Toronto mayoral election, 2014 itself — but that article already contains links in body text to all of the relevant candidates, so providing a templated set of repeated links to the same articles isn't necessary or valuable. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 18:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Neutral. I don't see the harm in having this infobox on the bio pages. There are bios for some of the minor candidates as well, and 67 names on the ballot. I also don't expect there to be much harm done to ease of navigation if this navbox goes away. Ivanvector (talk) 19:05, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * delete per Bearcat. Frietjes (talk) 22:29, 2 October 2014 (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:TVUS

 * 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) 21:07, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * TVUS

The documentation at Template:Infobox television and Template:Infobox television season both discourage the use of wikilinks in the infoboxes per WP:OVERLINK. Template:Infobox television channel doesn't have any instruction on the matter. Not sure where else the country parameter might be used, but it's unclear what purpose this template serves if consensus has shifted to exclude wikilinks from the main templates. (I have listed this nomination at WikiProject Television to solicit other voices.) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:24, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Not everything needs a template; I'm getting really tired of templates being created solely out of laziness, and this is a perfect example. Surely the extra few seconds typing United States aren't truly a massive waste of time in the grand scheme.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 18:46, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, because that is brought up, the deletion policy of it is causing problems in the infoboxes in TV shows, due to it's message about being considered for deletion. That has to be solved soon. BattleshipMan (talk) 20:57, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The message is supposed to alert people to the fact that the template is nominated, but I've reduced the size by adding sidebar to the deletion tag. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 06:06, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Very Strong Keep - Saves time and already has all of the information we need in one place; why go and delete this one, and then waste extra time adapting another template to our needs when we already have one for this topic? Besides, this template is already very organized and looks rather nice the way it is right now; I don't really see any need for deletion or even significant modification, as a matter of fact. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment There is no need for a template. All it does is redirect to a certain link that should be typed out (or in most cases, United States works just as well). This is over-templating for the sake of over-templating.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 13:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Just a note that United States shouldn't be used. The infobox instructions are quite clear, per WP:OVERLINK country names should not be linked. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 14:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to know that now; I never have added anything to that part of the template but I did feel "United States" was too generic.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 15:34, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong delete – Absolutely redundant template. — Indian: BIO  · [ ChitChat  ] 06:51, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - This template originally linked "United States" to Television in the United States and added the articles in which it was used to . The automatic categorisation was removed soon after the template was created in 2009, leaving just the link. Five years later, only 506 articles use the template, while the categories that replaced "American TV" contain many thousands of articles. It's not a widely used template and never likely to be. Looking at Television in the United States, I don't see a lot of benefit in linking the country to that article for the average reader. If it was found that there were some benefit, it's more likely a better option to have the television infobox autolink to Television in so that non-US countries would benefit. For these reasons I see no real reason for this template to be kept. Saving 4 keystrokes over typing "United States" really doesn't warrant mention. As an aside, is it too late to add TVUK to this nomination? -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 14:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Nominate it and drop me a note so I can chime in. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:01, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - I'm pretty much natural about this. I will say that while the template maybe redundant, but it does save time to avoid typing United States on there. I would do something quicker to add something like that by creating a template or something along those lines. BattleshipMan (talk) 18:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The template doesn't do what you would expect to. When I see United States wikilinked, I assume it's there to tell me more about the United States. A Television in the United States category would be more suitable or as part of a See Also section, where it would be more obvious. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, per Overlink. I always thought this was an odd duck. Linking it to TV in the US is also not needed. —  Wylie pedia  21:13, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Seems more convenient just to have it, can't think of the benefits of not keeping it. --xcuref1endx (talk) 01:32, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment-It has both pros and cons,For some readers it is easier to get information about 'TV in the US' without having to search for it.But as per Overlink names of major geographic locations should not be linked.-- Chamith  (talk)  07:06, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - There's no reason why one cannot simply write "United States", It's simply lazy to use templates like these. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  20:24, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - And who's going to go through every single television series page on Wikipedia and change the deprecated template? AlexTheWhovian (talk) 04:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I nominate you. Or a bot. I'd rather a bot do it. But if you're not busy... Anyhow, we don't need to go through every TV page. Only the ones that link to TVUS. If five of us did ten a day, we'd burn through it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:50, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Or you could use AWB to do it, as it's only 500 pages. A single person could do them in no time at all. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 08:58, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I hope Alex knew I was kidding. I have AWB, and I can do it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:46, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Substitute and delete. I don't necessarily agree with the WP:OVERLINK claim since the link may or may not exist elsewhere in the articles that transclude this template, but I do agree that it's unnecessary since the article can just be linked to directly (or maybe have the infobox edited somehow to accommodate for this, such as editing the parameter to create this link when "US" is used as a value for it.) Steel1943  (talk) 16:46, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Subst and delete per Steel1943 —PC-XT+ 01:22, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Deletefast delete. --Qa003qa003 (talk) 15:28, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * delete Frietjes (talk) 22:28, 2 October 2014 (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.