Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 February 20 - Wikipedia

Article Images

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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:Mark Millar. ✗plicit 23:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Millarworld (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

What is the point in having a Millarworld-specific navbox, when the navbox about its creator {{Mark Millar}} covers the articles already, in addition to his other work? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with {{Mark Millar}}, there's some articles in this new template that aren't in the Mark Millar template. Theooolone (talk) 02:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Theooolone. 209.151.151.155 (talk) 04:16, 21 February 2024 (UTC) – sock vote struck NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with/Redirect to {{Mark Millar}} as they cover much of the same articles. Trailblazer101 (talk) 20:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete after replacing with {{sort under}} Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sorting row (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Sort under}}. They work in different ways, so a redirect is not possible. However, this version just has fewer features. House Blaster (talk · he/him) 02:29, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Substitute then delete or redirect. {{Sorting row}} has limitations: no "unsortable", no "data-sort-type", and one alignment. I've heard it's difficult to use. It and the manual process add an accessibility issue, per the linked help page. {{Sort under}} solves the issue, difficulty, and limitations. A substitution is possible, so it can be redirected or deleted afterwards. Not sure if a delete is preferred since implementation differs? Jroberson108 (talk) 04:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replace transclusions, then delete. Changed, didn't know replace was possible. Jroberson108 (talk) 04:19, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Substitute~~ Replace with {{sort under}}, then delete. No redirect. I do not want people using that template alias. It is not as simple as {{sort under}} and its matching class=sort-under. Is there some way to find pages using {{sorting row}} (or it aliases {{sort row}} and {{static row numbers arrows}}) and data-sort-type= on the same page? That and the accessibility problem are the main issues with that template. The combination breaks the desired sorting. So I would like to see those pages corrected first. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HouseBlaster and Timeshifter: I also would like to see the transclusions of {{sorting row}} replaced with {{sort under}} to fix the accessibility issue. I didn't mention it since it seems improbable due to one being added to a row and the other the table. Since "data-sort-type" can't be used with the old template, there is nothing that can be found. If "data-sort-type" was needed but not added due to the template's limitations, then the only solution I can think of is don't substitute and instead manually examine and change each transclusion, then delete the old template. Jroberson108 (talk) 16:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jroberson108. People have added {{sorting row}} to tables that already had data-sort-type= in the table. The table continues to sort, but it sorts incorrectly. Editors just haven't noticed it since it is a subtle change. That's why I would like to find those tables first, and substitute {{sort under}}. --Timeshifter (talk) 16:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Timeshifter: Can you provide a page link where this is done? I'm unaware of this type of usage. Based on that page, I might be able to do a regex search. Jroberson108 (talk) 16:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jroberson108. It doesn't happen often since data-sort-type= is not needed often. Whenever I saw the problem I immediately fixed the problem by removing {{sorting row}}. You could emulate it quickly in a sandbox by entering the problematic combination on a table created from the edit toolbar. We could just forget about it since it is not common. Eventually all usages of {{sorting row}} will be substituted, and that also solves the data-sort-type= problem too. --Timeshifter (talk) 17:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Is it possible to automate this change: [1] Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 21:59, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Timeshifter and Jroberson108: is there a reason you want to substitute this template? I was thinking we should replace all instances with {{sort under}}. House Blaster (talk · he/him) 22:51, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe substituting one template for the other is the same thing as replacing one with the other. --Timeshifter (talk) 05:01, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Timeshifter: they are different things. At TfD, when we say "substitute", we mean literal substitution (i.e. changing {{sorting row}} to {{subst:sorting row}}). House Blaster (talk · he/him) 19:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rjjiii and HouseBlaster: I'm not too familiar with TfD possibilities. If it can be automated, then I'm all in. Jroberson108 (talk) 03:51, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jroberson108: at TfD, the possibilities are practically endless. Even if it could not be automated, that's what the WP:HOLDINGCELL is for. (Some things take gnomes years...) In this case, it can be done with WP:AWB. House Blaster (talk · he/him) 03:55, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 01:47, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replace {{sorting row}} transclusions with {{sort under}}, then delete {{sorting row}}. The two are used differently, so no redirect. Jroberson108 (talk) 02:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replace transclusions with {{sort under}}, then delete. Agree with the above proposal. {{sorting row}} relies on a quirk of how sortable tables are handled by creating an empty row. This creates a blank row in the table for some screen readers and the mobile apps. {{sort under}} does not have these issues, offers positioning control, and allows non-sorting rows. There are no advantages of the older template, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]