Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 June 28



Unerpopulated compounds by element navboxes

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Primefac (talk) 00:40, 6 July 2018 (UTC) Not enough bluelinked articles. Not enough articles in the corresponding categories. – Laundry Pizza 03  ( d c&#x0304; ) 15:07, 3 June 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Dysprosium compounds
 * Holmium compounds
 * Thulium compounds
 * Radium compounds
 * Protactinium compounds
 * Curium compounds
 * Einsteinium compounds
 * Keep all. There are not many bluelinks now, but there could easily be more, since these elements have been investigated in bulk. A good start for Ra, Pa, Cm, and Es could be the Radiochemistry of the Elements series. The lanthanides can surely have even more. I see no problem with having lots of redlinks in templates if there are a few bluelinks already to get started and the redlinks could easily support articles; I helped with exactly this sort of expansion for a while ago. Double sharp (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 01:59, 12 June 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. WP:EXISTING requires avoidance of redlinks in navboxes unless the contents represent all the members of a set or the articles are very likely to be developed. I'm unconvinced without more that either of those two conditions are met here. That doesn't mean this navbox wouldn't be useful in the future, but since its primary purpose per Navigation template is navigation, it doesn't seem useful presently. --Bsherr (talk) 19:07, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 23:30, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep all. It seems arbitrary to say there must be five written articles about compounds of a chemical element in order to have a navigation box. See the complete list at Category:Chemistry compounds templates. Why not six or four? One can argue about including red links, but these elements have compounds. Happily the noble gases, which do have difficulty forming compounds, are all included in a single navbox. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:57, 29 June 2018 (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).

Module:Handball color

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was merge to Module:Sports color. But let do the merge (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 04:33, 8 July 2018 (UTC) Propose merging Module:Handball color, Module:Baseball color, Module:Basketball color and Module:Hockey team color.
 * Handball color
 * Baseball color
 * Basketball color
 * Hockey team color

Almost exactly duplicate modules, only significant difference is the name of the /data module, which could be a parameter rather than a separate module. The merged module should be called Module:Sports color. &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 18:05, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed For my from the Handball part is this ok. --Malo95 (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * sure, but please let me do the merging. it's really just the baseball and basketball ones that require careful merging.  the other two could be simply deleted as unused. Frietjes (talk) 13:42, 6 July 2018 (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).

Template:2014 FIBA World Championship for Women finalists

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was delete no oppose. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 11:06, 8 July 2018 (UTC) Redundant to Template:2014 FIBA World Championship for Women. The teams are already listed in the 2014 FIBA World Championship for Women template aside from an error where Mali is listed which should be Mozambique. Whpq (talk) 13:18, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * 2014 FIBA World Championship for Women finalists
 * delete, the detailed results should be listed in the article, not in the navbox. Frietjes (talk) 13:43, 6 July 2018 (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).

Template:Portal flag talk

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 00:39, 6 July 2018 (UTC) Redundant to using Portal maintenance status on the portal itself and WikiProject Portals on the portal talk page, as noted on the documentation. No longer has any transclusions in the Portal_talk: namespace. Evad37 &#91;talk] 01:43, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Portal flag talk
 * Yep, I agree. Nuke it. — AfroThundr (u · t · c) 01:58, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete It is just going to cause confusion if we keep it and the new template makes the implemenation more simple. Dreamy Jazz talk &#124; contribs 09:20, 28 June 2018 (UTC)


 * It is transcluded twice :: see Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Portal_flag_talk. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, one of those is its own testpage, and the other is an auto-generated list from one of User:Pppery's modules. Not in any "real" use now. — AfroThundr (u · t · c) 04:40, 2 July 2018 (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).