Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 November 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 24 November 26 >

November 25[edit]

Template:New England sports[edit]

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 relist to Dec 4. Primefac (talk) 05:37, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicates sports teams by state templates. All 6 New England states have their own template. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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:Tuguegarao City TV[edit]

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) Primefac (talk) 05:28, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BethNaught (talk) 08:40, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. It's useless that only one article has it transclused. 121.54.54.236 (talk) 05:00, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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:Clean up categories from year[edit]

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 relist to Dec 4. Primefac (talk) 05:38, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and not really useful template. The two boxes on the right are not correct (and in general the "use language X" templates should not be in "clean up categories anyway), especially the bottom one is useless. The intention was probably to replace the text on cats like Category:Clean up categories from 2015 (so could be used on at most 10 pages or so), but as that one isn't correct either, it makes little sense to use this template instead. Fram (talk) 08:23, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fram, the "Older Clean up categories" and "Clean up categories" boxes on the right should be consolidated into a single box. Yes, there is a bug here, introduced with the conversion of the logic for creating the "Clean up categories" box to Lua – see Template talk:Progress box#Lua version not including subcategories. Wbm1058 (talk) 18:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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:ISO 3166 name Canada[edit]

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 possibility of creating/moving to a new location can be further discussed on the talk page. Primefac (talk) 05:34, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be the only template of this form (with the full country name in the template name, instead of a two-letter code or something similar. A template that replaces "ISO 3166 name Canada" with "Canada" seems rather pointless. It isn't used anywhere at the moment. Fram (talk) 08:08, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the system is more resilient to incorrect input with this template than without. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:51, 25 November 2015 (UTC).[reply]
    • Cound you give an example of where this has been useful, and if so why we don't have the same redirects for all other countries? At the moment these templates are mainly (only?) used in Template:Timatic, where editors have to give two-letter codes for country of nationality and country of destination (for visa requirements), which then gets translated to the full countries by the template. Letting people simply put in the full country name instead seems a lot more editor-friendly. Yes, people may get the name wrong if they have to write it in full, but (as evidenced by this and other such templates) they may also get it wrong when they need to put a code. Creating a template to make linking to a website easier is a good thing: creating a long list of 2-letter code templates to avoid putting in the country name is dubious, and then creating extra templates with the full name because people get it wrong seems like serious overkill. Fram (talk) 13:16, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a redirect. In the other direction (name or code → code), the same concept has existed for years (see Category:ISO 3166 code from name country templates). It's a shame we're not perusing these templates much more. But there's no reason aliases that indeed enhance resiliency should not exist, but they should exist as redirects, unless someone comes up with a Lua module. PanchoS (talk) 08:24, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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:Free software for searching maximum clique[edit]

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 convert to an article if and only if it can be properly sourced (i.e. meets GNG), otherwise delete. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 05:24, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This template is not used on any pages. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:34, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. It was until very recently included in clique (graph theory) (where it is off topic, I believe, as insufficiently mathematical) and clique problem (where it is on-topic but was used as a stealth way to include an unsourced link farm). Even if one argues that the content should be included in clique problem (and I don't think it should) then there is no good reason for it to be a separate template. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:08, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Articleify for the reasons David gives above, seems like useful external links. Find a perl CPAN library too! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC).[reply]
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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_November_25&oldid=693688905"