Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 January 15 - Wikipedia


Template:Thesis author

Article Images
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Izno (talk) 20:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Templates to track VE bugs. No longer in use, and new bugs should go to Phabricator anyway. User:GKFXtalk 18:28, 15 January 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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. Primefac (talk) 21:27, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there's a reasonable replacement for this template used only a half dozen times using standard style. Izno (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think this may be used as a subst-only template. I find hundreds of instances of text that is similar to the text in this template, but no other template that seems to match it. The history says that it was created as a fork of {{Shared IP}}, which now uses different language. It may be possible to merge this template's wording into {{Shared IP}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, proxies are blocked when we see them, so I think that's probably the interesting template, but either way, pretty sure these kinds of templates are not substed anymore. Izno (talk) 21:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, although it appears as though this has been substituted in the past (User talk:162.93.199.1) I couldn't find any places where it was recently substituted. Adding a |proxy=y option to {{Shared IP}} should be sufficient if an alternate version is needed. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:49, 23 January 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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. Izno (talk) 18:17, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 16:00, 15 January 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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 move to subpages of template:rndnear Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:17, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sub templates of Template:Round (other than in 1 talk page). Gonnym (talk) 12:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (was about to nominate them myself). User:GKFXtalk 12:19, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gonnym and User:GKFX, were you aware that it is used in Template:Rndnear? Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. It would seem that until your addition to the example in the /doc it didn't appear as used. Withdrawn then (though still surprised that it isn't used at all). Gonnym (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Move to rndnear/* rather than withdraw, I think? User:GKFXtalk 13:51, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gonnym and User:GKFX, I just removed Template:Rndnear from Template:Cyclone wind converter (metric), so maybe move it to a subpage of rndnear/ and/or nominate rndnear? 13:57, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll nominate rndnear. Gonnym (talk) 14:09, 22 January 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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:ACE discussion. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:23, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:ACE2021 discussion with Template:ACE discussion.
I recently created a generic ACE discussion template to support ACE discussions, but would like to go through the TFD process as the calling locations would probably need to be replaced/change. And separately, the new template could probably use auto-detection of the year (but I still haven't figured out string.gsub). Izno (talk) 06:03, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: It would probably help if you showed {{ACE discussion}} in use somewhere so that we can get a sense of how this transition might work. The new template currently has zero transclusions, so it's hard to know if it is a valid replacement. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:31, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It will probably need a little evolution, but this was what was needed. As I said, it could use year auto-detection, but for modern versions of all these ACE discussion templates, it should be close to drop in. Izno (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That looks reasonable; for some reason when I tried it, it looked different and I couldn't make it work. Support merge. Let's snow close this thing and move on. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I couldn't make it work by having the intermediary template, but as you can see had no issue with direct transclusion. I'm sure there's a way to do that, but I didn't want to deal with it. :) Izno (talk) 17:49, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly support. As a template editor, and as someone who had to deal with this mess of templates as a member of the ElectCom for ACE a few years back, there is zero reason to have a new template for every year - simply having the year be a parameter is more than good enough. When I was on ElectCom that was one of my goals after the election finished but sadly I got distracted by other things and it never happened. Primefac (talk) 09:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. I've added the automatic year detection you wanted by using {{#invoke:String|match|PAGENAME|%d%d%d%d}}. So if all the titles this is used on use a 4 digit year number in their title, it will find them. Gonnym (talk) 10:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy sure @Izno: Think it is safe to say that the only people that are going to care about the mechanics of this template aren't going to care about getting it improved, and the transclusion count on these very low. — xaosflux Talk 11:39, 15 January 2022 (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).