Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 August 25



Template:Template container category

 * 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. G7 (non-admin closure) --Trialpears (talk) 20:13, 25 August 2019 (UTC) Unused template redundant to with container=yes. It is also self contradictory since it says "This category contains pages in the template namespace", but that is another problem. --Trialpears (talk) 19:47, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Template container category
 * It's supposed to be used on categories of templates that only contain templates via sub categories. These types of categories are known as container categories.
 * All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 19:59, 25 August 2019 (UTC).


 * I understood that but it generates the same thing as with container=yes which is what's actually used on these categories. --Trialpears (talk) 20:02, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I have g7'd it. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:09, 25 August 2019 (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:Canoeing at the 2020 Summer Olympics – List of Qualified NOCs

 * 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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 23:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC) The template is only used in one location. I have merged the content of the template into the article it was being used in Canoeing at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Qualification. This renders this template unnecessary, which is why I am nominating it for deletion. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:34, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Canoeing at the 2020 Summer Olympics – List of Qualified NOCs
 * 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:United States men's national soccer team record

 * 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) 13:48, 7 September 2019 (UTC) This template should be deleted because it's already on the main USMNT templates, and it doesn't connect to any categories. KingSkyLord (Talk page &#124; Contributions) 13:07, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * United States men's national soccer team record
 * delete or redirect to Template:United States men's national soccer team. Frietjes (talk) 17:10, 2 September 2019 (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:NDSU Bison starting quarterback navbox

 * 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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 23:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC) redundant with Template:NDSU Bison quarterback navbox Joeykai (talk) 06:27, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * NDSU Bison starting quarterback navbox
 * Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:41, 27 August 2019 (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:Documentation/ruler

 * 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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 23:34, 1 September 2019 (UTC) Unused template. Redundant to standard Template:Documentation. —⁠andrybak (talk) 05:59, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Documentation/ruler
 * 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).

Think tanks by office location

 * 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) 13:52, 7 September 2019 (UTC) While I appreciate the effort gone into these templates, they are not useful. Principally, organizing research institutes and think tanks by their location is not a natural classification. Organizing by research areas, outputs, methodologies, or ideological orientation might be justifiable, but the fact that two think tanks are located on the same block is not the basis for any relationship. Second, the number of such organizations in the U.S. is vast, with an overwhelming concentration of them is to be found in a handful of cities, principally Washington and New York and their suburbs. The number of WP articles about think tanks is likely to continue to increase, and the grounds for deletion of "American think tanks" a year ago as "too large to be useful as a navigational aid. Best left for categories and articles" stands for these as well. - choster (talk) 04:42, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Mid-Atlantic U.S. research institutes and think tanks
 * New England research institutes and think tanks
 * Leaning delete. I could actually see having templates by city for certain large cities such as New York City, Washington D.C., and Boston, but these regional accumulations sweep too wide. bd2412  T 03:12, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Split. If the size of the navboxes is the concern, I would argue for just splitting them by city/metropolitan area. I disagree with the assertion that organizing research institutes by geographic location is not a natural classification. Research institutes and think tanks typically cluster in the same urban areas to the extent that certain cities like Cambridge, Massachusetts are hubs for these types of organizations. Additionally, because some research institutes and think tanks are not necessarily affiliated with each other or any university or other academic network (e.g. in the New England template, the New England Complex Systems Institute, the National Bureau of Economic Research, MassINC, or the institutions in the Longwood Medical and Academic Area) it arguably makes organizing the institutes and think tanks by geography in fact the more logical way to organize them because they are part of the same research area (e.g. Longwood, Research Triangle in North Carolina, Northwest DC). -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 15:24, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm not sure there's even a concrete definition of what exactly constitutes "Mid-Atlantic". Just see Mid-Atlantic (United States) for that discussion. Psu256 (talk) 17:38, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * delete, seems to be WP:OR. Frietjes (talk) 17:11, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Huge boxes containing links if little value. Sorting by location doesn't make much sense as they don't have much in common and is better done in categories. I would however support an alternate navbox series for think tanks by advocacy area. --Trialpears (talk) 20:09, 3 September 2019 (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).