Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 August 4 - Wikipedia
- 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:02, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Holland (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
The band's navigational template consists of eight articles: the band's article, a band member's article, a band member redirected back to the band, an album redirected back to the band and four "related" bands that should not be included in the template. This leaves two articles that are already connected that are not enough justification to have a navigational template, the band has no notable releases and WP:NENAN. Aspects (talk) 23:40, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for reasons stated Mujinga (talk) 19:10, 6 August 2019 (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).
- 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 merge to Template:Progression rainbow. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Progression rainbow (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:WikiProject progression rainbow (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:Progression rainbow with Template:WikiProject progression rainbow.
The WikiProject functionality could easily be added to the main template --Trialpears (talk) 12:16, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- No objections as creator czar 12:19, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- No objections as creator of Progression rainbow. --PresN 14:09, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Support This is easily automated, works better if automated, and is not useful in other contexts. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Seems like a logical merge, should cut down on maintenance. BLAIXX 12:40, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Automation will indeed facilitate maintenance, as it will reduce the likelihood of miscounting, forgetting to add newly created articles, or forgetting to update when an article is reassessed. ComplexRational (talk) 18:24, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Correction to the last 3 voters- Progression Rainbow is used directly in a few places for counting article groups that cannot be automated (without a bot)- automation only works in this case if all of the articles belong to defined categories. If I wanted to track the relative counts of article class inside of "all high-priority articles for project X", I can't do it automatically, because each color would be representing the intersection of two categories (e.g. stub-class and high-priority), and wikipedia does not provide a way to count those without a bot. Merging the two templates will not fix this; it just combines two similar templates. --PresN 19:13, 10 August 2019 (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).