Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 September 19 - Wikipedia


Article Images
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 for mergeOpabinia regalis (talk) 02:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Professional Fraternities with Template:Fraternities and Sororities.
A Professional Fraternity is still a Fraternity, albeit one of several different types as Template:Fraternities and Sororities already shows. In terms of Articles on different organizations, it would be more user-friendly just to have 1 NavBox for all Greek Organizations that already have their own Articles. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 21:23, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support: No reason to split this off. ~ RobTalk 21:28, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Decline: There is a gap separating several classes of fraternities: Professional, Honorary, and Social/traditional/multicultural groups. Further separated, there are the adult groups, such as the Freemasons and Oddfellows. Thus it becomes a subjective matter as to where to draw the line. I don't think this merge is necessary. Jax MN (talk) 03:36, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Some of the listed "Professional" Fraternities have more standard trappings of Social Fraternities than they do of Honorary Fraternities. Alpha Phi Omega, for example, is if anything more similar to Phi Delta Theta (or Lambda Lambda Lambda seeing how it's coed) than it is to Mu Phi Epsilon or Psi Omega (both of which are specific to a respective Major). As for non-collegiate groups (a term now preferable since almost all college students are in fact adults, the Age of Majority having been 18 in the USA since 1971 and being 18 in most though not all other countries), or more specifically the ones you mentioned, they draw their origins (of the type or general structure of the organization, specific groups being another matter) from early veteran's organizations that were set up for the Knights of the First Crusade. The Greek movement draws its origins (in that same sense) from Philosopher's Societies that existed in Ancient Greece. We are talking about 2 distinct movements from 2 origins. The merged NavBox would definitely apply to the Greek movement rather than the Masonic movement. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 21:20, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merge - The social fraternity/sorority navbox is already too large and poorly organized. Layering in the professional fraternities will only make a bigger mash of it. Frankly, it would be better to split the existing navbox into its constituent parts rather than creating an even larger superbox. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 06:49, 25 September 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).

Orphaned ISBN templates

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 deleteOpabinia regalis (talk) 19:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC) I'm listing the remaining orphaned ISBN templates at User:Ricky81682/cite based on this listing. The prior listing had passed seven days and it seemed wrong to list it there. The rest need to be orphaned but that's not that many. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Those are all orphaned. There is nowhere to substitute them. - Ricky81682 (talk) 12:40, 19 September 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).