Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 September 11



Discontinued switch templates for Template:Infobox Olympic 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 September 24. Primefac (talk) 00:41, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Infobox_Olympic_games/closing_ceremony
 * Infobox_Olympic_games/opening_ceremony
 * Infobox_Olympic_games/events
 * Infobox_Olympic_games/host_city
 * Infobox_Olympic_games/stadium
 * 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).

New York and Long Branch templates

 * 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. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:01, 18 September 2018 (UTC) S-line templates describing various services over the New York and Long Branch Railroad. Because it was co-owned by the Pennsylvania Railroad and the Central Railroad of New Jersey there were duplicate templates for both companies. I've consolidated this into a single set of templates for the New York and Long Branch itself. Mackensen (talk) 00:33, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * S-line/Central Railroad of New Jersey left/NY&LB
 * S-line/Central Railroad of New Jersey right/NY&LB
 * S-line/PRR right/Camden-Long Branch
 * S-line/PRR left/North Coast
 * S-line/PRR right/North Coast
 * S-line/PRR left/Camden-Long Branch
 * Camden-Long Branch is not the same system. Mitch 32 (My ambition is to hit .400 and talk 1.000.) 01:54, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Correct, but it physically overlapped in parts and two nominations would be excessive. The PRR line only extended as far as Bay Head. Mackensen (talk) 12:40, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Then keep the Camden-Long Branch one and delete the rest. Mitch 32 (My ambition is to hit .400 and talk 1.000.) 15:33, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 10:31, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Link to the new templates? — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 03:05, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:35, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * delete, not used. Frietjes (talk) 22:14, 18 September 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:American Indian music by group

 * 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 opposition. Primefac (talk) 00:08, 24 September 2018 (UTC) Unused. In any case most of the active links are for the peoples, not the music, which is not what this navbox is for. If it is to be kept it needs to be stripped of links to these articles and have the redlinks trimmed. -- wooden superman  15:53, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * American Indian music by group
 * delete, better to focus on Template:Indigenous music of North America Frietjes (talk) 22:14, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * With regard to these changes, I think it now just duplicates the Indigenous music of North America sidebar. -- wooden  superman  14:09, 21 September 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:Children's 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 06:42, 21 September 2018 (UTC) Subjective and selective inclusion. Full inclusion would result in an unmanageable navbox. Best left to category and list navigation. -- wooden superman  15:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Children's games
 * Keep (came here after seeing this was up for deletion). So it's selective, yes, pick the best and most well known and then add a (more...) as utilized on many good templates. That way nothing is lost and more is shown. List and categories are good too, the three ways of listing Wikipedia's storehouse of information go hand-in-hand-in-hand. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:08, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It would be incredibly poor practice to "pick the best and most well known". Who decides which are "best"?  Navboxes are not made for topics like this, where inclusion is decided arbitrarily and subjectively.  Adding a "more" is also poor practice and does not remotely address the issue.  -- wooden  superman  13:37, 17 September 2018 (UTC)


 * delete, selection criteria is WP:OR. Frietjes (talk) 22:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * delete "best and most well known" is far too vague of a criteria for inclusion, navboxes are made more for where a complete set can be navigated Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:40, 20 September 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:Nursery rhymes

 * 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. I am going to close this discussion as delete per consensus and orphan this template using AWB. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC) Inclusion is selective (it does not include everything from Category:Nursery rhymes or List of nursery rhymes) and it's too unmanageable to be a suitable topic for a navbox. Best left for category and list navigation. -- wooden superman  11:18, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Nursery rhymes
 * Strong Keep (wazamatterwithyou?) A very nice template that puts together, in one place and in an easy readable format, the rhymes and sayings of childhood. This topic is good for a category, for a list, and for a template (three different forms of searching for and becoming better acquainted with information, readers tend to like one of the three better than the others, they are not mutually exclusive but inclusive). This deletion attempt is, to say the least, a "green and yellow basket". Randy Kryn (talk) 12:04, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * You haven't addressed the concerns regarding the fact that someone has made an arbitrary selection here, causing WP:UNDUE issues. -- wooden  superman  13:34, 17 September 2018 (UTC)


 * delete, would be better to create more list articles, or subcategories. a complete navbox would be too large. Frietjes (talk) 22:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. This navbox provides no great value above and beyond the list and categories, the categorization in the template is a bit dubious to me, and the incompleteness aspect of the template is generally concerning. --Izno (talk) 02:32, 22 September 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:Final Surrender

 * 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. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 07:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC) This band's navigational template consists of one article, the band's article. It therefore navigates nowhere and is not needed. Aspects (talk) 03:25, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Final Surrender
 * Delete. Useless.  -- wooden  superman  11:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Too insignificant since there is only one link. Sdmarathe (talk) 03:56, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, let it live up to its name. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:10, 15 September 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).