Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 July 13



Template:Miss Universe China

 * 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. —  Earwig   talk 22:45, 23 July 2015 (UTC) only links two articles. Frietjes (talk) 16:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Miss Universe China

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 15:59, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Alakzi (talk) 15:59, 13 July 2015 (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:Iran Squad 2015 FIVB Volleyball World League

 * 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. (nac) Alakzi (talk) 20:01, 6 August 2015 (UTC) non-notable squad. World League is an annually tournament and this is just a roster from one of the matches and this team could not make it to the final six. similar situation as Templates for discussion/Log/2015 January 1. Mohsen1248 (talk) 15:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Iran Squad 2015 FIVB Volleyball World League
 * Delete-- Samək Talk 19:57, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Please notice that this is the creator of this template, even himself thinks this template should get deleted. Mohsen1248 (talk) 23:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator's rationale. There are ample precedents that team roster navboxes should be restricted to teams in major championships, and in most cases, to the champion teams only (although exceptions exist).  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:00, 16 July 2015 (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:Board games

 * 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. —  Earwig   talk 01:58, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Board games

Fails WP:NAVBOX, specifically 1, 2, 3, 596.52.0.249 (talk) 00:24, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Hyacinth (talk) 00:24, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * why?96.52.0.249 (talk) 22:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Opabinia regalis (talk) 21:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 15:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nominator. This navbox fails the basic criteria that make up a good navbox. --Izno (talk) 15:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * move to . Frietjes (talk) 21:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That would make the template fail 4 of WP:NAVBOX. There is no way around this except for deletion.96.52.0.249 (talk) 23:08, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * see List of board game awards Frietjes (talk) 21:01, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * But is it necessary? I think not.  Is it redundant to the category system?  I think so.  None of the board game awards are related to each other.  Why make a navbox when they are not related by association but by categorization?96.52.0.249 (talk) 23:51, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * All navboxes are unnecessary, but we keep them because they are useful. you don't think it's useful. I think it's useful. it's all just opinion at this point. Frietjes (talk) 13:43, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The line is drawn through the relationship between linked articles. It would be creep to navboxes for every topic simply because they are trivially related, as in this case.68.148.186.93 (talk) 22:02, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * List of board game awards is a redirect to List of Game of the Year awards (board games), which is about a specific type of board game awards. Alakzi (talk) 16:12, 17 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom - grab bag navbox, better served by a category. Alakzi (talk) 16:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete category serves same purpose.--JudgeJason (talk) 10:49, 2 August 2015 (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:Read more top

 * 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. I find the keep argument unconvincing here, as it does not address MOS:COLLAPSE. —  Earwig   talk 02:47, 12 August 2015 (UTC) Redundant to Collapse and Hidden. Alakzi (talk) 15:54, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Read more top
 * Read more bottom
 * Read more


 * Keep. Not redundant; there's a movement to make those unusable in article space.--Elvey(t•c) 16:48, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * (a) Yes, it is redundant, irrespective of any "movement"; it's performs the exact same function as the other two templates. (b) The movement must've got long claws, because their aim is - in fact - part of the MOS. (c) Did you think that said movement's adherents would care what the template is called? Alakzi (talk) 17:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Please watch your tone. Please don't misrepresent the MOS like that, as I just noted elsewhere.  It is usable where the others are not. --Elvey(t•c) 17:20, 13 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for interested in this template. It was originally created to resolve the issue of too long captions on an article "Mandolin" (see an example; this issue was discussed on the talk page), although I didn't yet reflect it on the article due to the several reasons; a major reason is that all templates using css class "collapsibleCollapsedTH" (including Hidden (protected), Collapse (semi-protected), and the current version of Read more (editable)) are not workable on the mobile view. (cf. desktop view) I think this issue (unsupport of mobile view) should be resolved with more simple way such as css selector :target or similar technique, instead of jQuery-based implementation currently used. However I don't know how to propose it on the Wikipedia jungle, thus the improvement of this template have been temporally pending. If you want to delete this template, probably it may be rational. However, this template may be later re-created with a more sophisticated code & behavior. thanks, --Clusternote (talk) 19:30, 13 July 2015 (UTC), [improved major reason]--Clusternote (talk) 04:34, 14 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I added template links to the other templates nominated. --Izno (talk) 15:35, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete all per WP:COLLAPSE for its uses in article space, redundancy with other templates outside of article space. --Izno (talk) 15:35, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * delete, duplicates hidden / hidden begin / hidden end. Frietjes (talk) 21:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, because other similar templates (Hidden, and Collapse families) are hard to improve the behavior on the Mobile View pages (because jQuery used on these templates is intentionally filtered on Mobile frontend). We need useful testbed templates (Read more family) to resolve this problem (support on Mobile View page). --Clusternote (talk) 07:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:43, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per arguments by User:Clusternote. -Mardus (talk) 20:36, 2 August 2015 (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:Law & Order: LA

 * 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. (nac) Alakzi (talk) 19:59, 6 August 2015 (UTC) Not enough linkable pages to justify a navbox. All links can be included within the prose of the article or a "See also" section.  True CRaysball  | #RaysUp 08:12, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Law & Order: LA
 * keep, connects more than 5 articles. Frietjes (talk) 21:06, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - Five links is generally the minimum number of links. This navbox has more than that. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 14:10, 4 August 2015 (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.