Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 May 2



Template:Bridgeport Bluefish 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 11:41, 10 May 2018 (UTC) Defunct team Spanneraol (talk) 18:15, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Bridgeport Bluefish roster
 * Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:04, 7 May 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:Fake heading

 * 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 keep. The template is not meant to be used in the Article space, and steps will be taken to ensure that it is a) removed from there, and b) set so that it displays a warning message if used in the future. Primefac (talk) 11:41, 10 May 2018 (UTC) Breaches accessibility guidelines.
 * Fake heading

See also prior discussion at Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_142 Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:28, 2 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I think there may be a valid use case for use as a demonstration tool for the stylings associated with a particular kind of heading, but broadly agree that A) this should be removed entirely from mainspace per its documentation and B) it should be strongly deprecated even outside mainspace except in the use case above. --Izno (talk) 16:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The other maybe-valid use case I see right off the bat is at e.g. Talk:Accenture, which is again to avoid TOCs type stuff for talk page drafting. That doesn't feel great, but it doesn't feel all that bad either. --Izno (talk) 19:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Looking at Talk:Accenture, I think this is a misuse of the template where it is used, and should instead be separate subheadings. If there was a full draft of one or more sections, I would be amenable to using it there, but as the various uses of Fake heading on that talk page are to separate parts of a request, I see no reason why normal headings should not be used. The primary use case for this template is for illustration within project pages and similar. There may be other edge cases where this template is useful, but most if not all the instances this template is used should fall under that primary use case.  Ham  tech  person  03:41, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I can fall either way on that use. --Izno (talk) 14:04, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * 979 transclusion(s) found Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)


 * A better alternative to deletion has already been proposed: transclude a warning into the article namespace when the template is used on it. Bright☀ 05:57, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is good; per AtD, a preferred option. —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap sh*t room 08:56, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * This supposes that breaking accessibility in non-article pages is acceptable. It is not. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:08, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but I suggest you accept this broadly-accepted solution over one that you have little to no chance of implementing. Since everyone who discussed it seems to agree that a transcluded warning in the article namespace is good, that can be an immediate first step, and other actions can follow after future discussions. Bright☀ 12:07, 3 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, restrict to non-mainspace. It's a useful template to have for documentation/help pages, such as Manual of Style/Layout, Manual of Style/Lists, Summary style, and others in the Wikipedia namespace. - Evad37 &#91;talk] 12:21, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, restrict to non-mainspace with a transcluded warning in main namespace for accessibility, ease of editing, and consistency. Bright☀ 12:34, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep –It is widely used in documentation and Project pages. Nobody say it should be used in mainspace. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:40, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per BrightR. Is it possible to add a tracking category for uses in main namespace? Nthep (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep: Way too destructive to delete it. It should just be invisible in articles, which can be done with some template code. Esquivalience (talk) 23:44, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, with no restrictions - Very useful. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:42, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow keep — important for wikitext tutorials — python coder   (talk &#124; contribs) 20:41, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, restrict from mainspace per my reply to Izno above. This template and the other documentation templates are important for the illustration of what will happen with certain wikimarkup or templates, without the other baggage (such as tracking categories or ToC insertion) that comes with that markup. It is a narrow use case, but one that serves a specific and necessary function.  Ham  tech  person  03:41, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep outside of mainspace with appropriate cautions against its use there. But raises an important point:  We should consider defining acceptable demonstration purposes in the template's documentation and also sanction against improper uses outside of mainspace.


 * I also wonder why we only have an WP:ACCESSIBILITY MoS, restricted to mainspace, but no accessibility policy that would enforce accessibility in all of our pages. Implementing the relevant WMF resolution and policy fully would certainly necessitate that. Anyone should be able to access not just articles but our behind the scenes as well. And not just as curious readers but as potential editors. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:39, 9 May 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).