Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 August 2: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion | Log Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 14:49, 4 August 2007 editDschwen (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users7,364 edits →[]← Previous edit		Revision as of 15:03, 4 August 2007 edit undoPigsonthewing (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors266,336 edits →[]: commentNext edit →
Line 190:		Line 190:

	*'''Delete''', slightly beyond the scope of an encyclopedia. Usefull for only a small user set. I'd prefer an opt-in solution which could easily be created with a small bit of Javascript. --] 14:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)		*'''Delete''', slightly beyond the scope of an encyclopedia. Usefull for only a small user set. I'd prefer an opt-in solution which could easily be created with a small bit of Javascript. --] 14:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

			:Most of Wikipeida - and certainly most of the advanced features - is only useful for a small user set. As I've already pointed out to you elsewhere, a Javascript-based alternative would by inaccessible to some people, and thereby a breach of ]. ] \| ] 15:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

	==== ] ====		==== ] ====

Revision as of 15:03, 4 August 2007

< August 1	August 3 >

August 2

Template:Work in Progress

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). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep and rename. This delete nomination was a misunderstanding, but nobody seems to object to a rename to something like "WQA in progress", which is a lot clearer. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 01:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Work in Progress (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (and {{Work in progress}} redir)

~~Delete~~ Rename and document per discussion below. Unused, and nonsensical anyway - all talk page topics that are not {{Resolved}} (or {{Stale}}, etc.) would qualify for this template. If it were actually deployed, it would be the most-used template on all of Misplaced Pages. Thankfully, everyone seems to understand that it is pointless. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 19:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC) Superseded by discussion below; simply needs to be renamed Template:WQA in progress. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 00:39, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Speedy Keep This template is not intended for regular talk pages. It was developed for and is used specifically on Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette alerts.The purpose of the template is to indicate for volunteer editors who are scanning the topics needing attention, that a given report is already getting attention from another volunteer. That way, they can skip reading those and look for ones that are not already marked as in active discussion. WP:WQA has been significantly upgraded as a dispute resolution page over the past few months and it has helped a lot of users resolve problems that otherwise would have gone to WP:AN or other forums. This template helps us do that work.

If your concern is that it might be over-used, we could modify the documentation on the template to indicate that it is not for regular talk pages and only for dispute resolution project pages. --Parsifal _Hello 20:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Works for me; I'd say move it to Template:WQA in progress, and definitely update the docs. Because it is specific to WQA's issues with fights on talk pages, I wouldn't document it as being for "dispute resolution project pages" but WP:WQA specifically — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 23:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, sounds good. I'll make those changes shortly. --Parsifal _Hello 02:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I started to work on moving the template. But I found that it apparently has been used on 15 or 20 talk pages, so I did not proceed with the renaming because I didn't want to mess up those pages with a template that changes to something they are not expecting.

Maybe it would be better to leave the template as it is, but modify the documentation to make it clear that it is not for regular talk pages but only for collaborative project pages, such as WQA, where editors need a status flag to avoid duplication of effort... something that would limit general use. It could turn out to be useful on other projects where they work on stuff together and need to co-ordinate their efforts, for example Wikiprojects talk pages or to-do lists.

I don't mind making the changes you suggested, but when I saw that some people were already using it, I thought it would be good to bring this up first and request additional input. --Parsifal _Hello 04:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

In reviewing the "what links here" examples further, I found that some editors are using the whole template series in an organized way, for example here: Talk:Calculus and Talk:General relativity. They seem to be finding it useful for organizing their work, so I suggest we let it be. If you don't agree about that, I'm open for further suggestions, but it seems unnecessary to delete or change a template that is being used productively.

I'm not trying to keep it for any personal reason, I was willing to change it to a WQA template, but when I discovered this usage I thought we should re-consider. What do you think? --Parsifal _Hello 05:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The usage at Talk:Calculus, etc. is precisely the issue. Every topic that is not resolved is "in progress", and this template has no legitimate function outside of the narrow circumstance it was intended for. No harm will come of moving it; the original name will work as a redirect, until handful of pages misusing it are cleaned up, then the redir can be RfDd. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 20:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I have fixed the misuses of the template (other than on individual's user pages; I don't like editing those even for template fixes), including use on generic talk pages, and mistaken use as a substitute for {{Inprogress}} on actual articles. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 21:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Also fixed the documentation, and fixed name to {{Work in progress}} per naming conventions (redir already existed, I simply swapped them, and made conforming move with the /doc file). I note that Template:WQA in Progress already existed, so I made the naming-conventions-recommended Template:WQA in progress as well; the subject of this TfD at this point is simply "move Template:Work in progress to Template:WQA in progress. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 00:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Myspace2

The result of the debate was speedy delete per G1. What a surprise that this wonderful template should come from an indefinitely blocked user . IronGargoyle 21:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Rather nonsensical. Misplaced Pages isn't Myspace. ><RichardΩ6 12 18:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete not sure what the point of this template is exactly but the wording suggests no good can come of it. --W.marsh 18:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Speedy Delete Cites nonsensical and fake rules, is bad written and it certainly seems like there's no argument that can save it. Paolobueno 20:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Speedy delete per G1, "irredeemable" "patent nonsense". — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 20:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:25 kV 60 Hz

Unused, and do we really need a template for these? ><Richard0612 17:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

No. Shalom 04:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete - I thought it might be a shortcut for commonly used voltages, but the name is just as long as what it subst's. I suggest you add the others ({{25 kV 50 Hz}}, {{15 kV AC}}) as well. I'd also contact the creator to ask for his rationale. ALTON .ıl 23:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Keep - This template is used on multiple articles for three different power standards for electrical railways. The template replaces (in the third template) 15 ] 16⅔ ] ], inculding the nonstandard ⅔ and & nbsp ; sign. This is quite a long block of code, and is excessivly difficult for multiple editors to both get correct and not at least write consequently. The 16kV template is transcluded in more than fourty articles, and is by far the least used of the three electrical standards on railways. Arsenikk 14:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Keep all - per Arsenikk. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett

Korean subway infoboxes

The first of these templates is being used in just ten articles, and is completely redundant to {{Koreanname}}. The rest of them all have extra fields for "next" and "preceeding" stations, but surely that depends entirely on which way you'd be travelling, and in any case there are various nav templates for these subway lines which already have that covered. Most of them aren't being used at all, and none of them in more than eight articles; these can all be replaced with {{Koreanname}} as well. PC78 17:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Redirect {{Korean subway}} to {{Koreanname}} (or manually replace {{Korean subway}} with {{Koreanname}})
Delete the rest per nom. eDenE 18:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think a redirect would be possible, as the parameters are not quite the same. No big deal to update ten articles, though. PC78 19:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Comment As creator, I can't deny they are underused. They were designed to supersede the other templates but never really caught on. However, the stations are numbered sequentially so there is a clear order to preceding and following, and the colours and links are useful for navigation, hence I would contend they are not redundant to Koreanname. Deiz talk 10:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough about the station numbers then, but I think my point about the nav templates having it covered still stands. At the very least, it should be possible to streamline the above into a single all-purpose infobox.
  - I would certainly agree that Korean subway (which is nothing to do with me) is entirely redundant to Koreanname. I would suggest asking the editors at Wikiproject Korea which template they prefer for individual stations, I'd be comfortable with any outcome if there was some kind of unified plan among interested parties for using one style from here on in. Deiz talk 14:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Starfleet officer rank insignia Nav

Navigation box used solely on recently-deleted individual Starfleet rank pages. Only one such article remains, and the relevant link to the more general rank page is provided in the infobox at the top. This navigation template no longer serves a purpose. --EEMeltonIV 16:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete. Per nom. ><RichardΩ6 12 18:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Bassist

Delete. Unused and redundant with {{Infobox musical artist}}. --PEJL 16:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom. There is nothing in this template that {{Infobox musical artist}} doesn't cover. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete as above, redundant. ><RichardΩ6 12 18:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete - The differences that aren't there aren't significant enough to warrant a separate template. Perhaps bassists don't consider themselves musicians... ALTON .ıl 23:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Weasel-inline

The result of the debate was Procedural keep, no harm in waiting for the discussion to end. Circeus 00:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Redirect them all to {{weasel word}}; redundant.. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 15:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Procedural strong keep; deletion nomination is premature. Merge of all of these templates is being actively discussed at WT:ILT and at Template talk:Who. The most likely outcome is that only {{weasel-inline}} and {{who}} will survive, possibly only the former. Nominator has hit on the same idea as everyone involved at WP:ILT, but is not part of the discussion, and thus unware that resolution is already in progress (and is certainly not going toward merge into {{weasel word}}, which is really {{Views needing attribution}}; rather, that one is on the merge-from slate.) Actually make that a speedy keep if possible; of the four deletion criteria that apply here only #2 "The template is redundant to another better-designed template" is even relevant, and there are already consensus discussions taking place as noted above, to determine what template that is. Also, this nomination is incomplete; most of the nominated templates are not TfD tagged. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 20:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Brave New World

Delete - with the exception of The World State and Brave New World (film) every link to an item of fiction from the template redirects to Brave New World. These items and the historical people listed are all interlinked through text links. The template is not needed for navigation. — Otto4711 15:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete. A navigation template that doesn't navigate? Pointless like a blunt pencil! ><RichardΩ6 12 18:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete, can be recreated once these articles exist. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 19:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete, per User:Melsaran Unschool 22:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Kml

Google's services shouldn't be favoured over all the others on Template:GeoTemplate. This service can and will be added to that list once the {{coord}} template's editprotected request is fulfilled. —Para 15:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Strong keep (nominated for deletion within minutes of creation, while only used once!). Template:GeoTemplate, which is for single waypoints, is irrelevant to the use of this template, which is for collections of waypoints, as I have already explained to the nom. more than once today. The hypothetically solution suggested is not yet available, and may never be, given the other flaws it includes, and may not be relevant for the aforesaid reasons of plurality. Google's service is not "favoured" - it's the only one available (the nom failed to meet my challenge to name others), which is not different to using, say, {{imdb title}}. When other such services are avallable, this template can link to a page listing them. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

All the services on Template:GeoTemplate have some unique features, and none of them are important enough to deserve a template of their own. The script this template links to just downloads a Misplaced Pages page and converts the coordinates to KML for Google Maps and Google Earth (among others, such as NASA World Wind), and this feature doesn't make it special enough to have it placed in all articles that have more than one instance of coordinates. Creating templates when a better solution is an admin's edit away is pointless and creates unnecessary work for people to clean up after you. --Para 15:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

"this feature doesn't make it special enough to have it placed in all articles that have more than one instance of coordinates" - Who said it was to be used like that? More FUD. There is no better solution "an admin's edit away". Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 16:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

If you give Wikipedians the tools, there is always someone daft enough to take example and use the template in other articles than where you personally have chosen. This template would apply for all articles that have multiple coordinates, and even if you had any ownership for the template, its uses or the articles, you would not be able to control where it's placed. As {{coord}} is implemented through so many templates, I won't place a full working copy of it in a sandbox, but you can see from the proposed change mentioned in the editprotected request that coord is requested to be modified to give the pagename to GeoHack, which already supports the &title parameter. Since there's currently nothing in Misplaced Pages to pass a title, it's not used in any of the Template:GeoTemplate services, but there's a sandboxed template with no change to the title part, where the title parameter can be seen for example here. Again, all that needs to be done is to fulfill the editprotected request and add this service of yours to Template:GeoTemplate. --Para 16:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see how Template:GeoTemplate can be updated for articles (or lists) like Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal and List of volcanoes in the United States of America. eDenE 19:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It's easy. All the service needs is an article name, and that's exactly what the modification to coord would make available to GeoHack. GeoHack would then only need to put together the url and the article name, which can be done in GeoTemplate with a link like "http://serviceurl/kml.php?url=http://en.wikipedia.org/{title}". The contents of the article make no difference, that's for the kml service to figure out. --Para 19:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

How about other links that can points to only 1 location? Will it output thousands of external links? I'm very confused :S eDenE 20:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Eh? The only external link used with coordinates is the one that leads to GeoHack, which generates a list of links based on Template:GeoTemplate, where people can choose to use this KML conversion service or any other service listed. If a page contains only one set of coordinates, the script that downloads the Misplaced Pages page and converts it to KML returns only one placemark. If the page contains thousands of them, the KML will contain thousands as well. In any case, there will be only one click from the article to GeoHack, another to choose the KML "export" service, and a single resulting http request from the tool to Misplaced Pages. Does that help you understand? --Para 20:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

"If the page contains thousands of them, the KML will contain thousands as well" - Which will be of no use because there is presently no mechanism for GeoTemplate to make use of it. Your proposal to pass the page name is flawed and may not pass. If it does pass; we don't know how long it will take to implement. {{kml}} is available for use now. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 22:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It can't in any meaningful way. Template:GeoTemplate is for single points; this is for series or collections of points. It would be semantically confusing, if not meaningless - a square peg in a round hole. And even that is not available yet. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 21:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

GeoTemplate exists to help people "find maps and data about the location", which covers locations defined as both single or multiple points. It makes no difference for the user, the KML service, or GeoHack whether the article has one or more points. You can start thinking of a good description to put in GeoTemplate for your service to make that clear to readers. The functionality is currently not available only because you and you alone keep opposing it over your own templates. --Para 22:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

"there is always someone daft enough to take example and use the template in other articles than where you personally have chosen" - I wasn't aware that we nominated templates for deletion on the grounds that somebody might, one day, misuse them. When did that policy change? Shall I nominate {{cleanup}}, say, for deletion, in case somebody uses it on a GA? It would be inappropriate to add this service to Template:GeoTemplate for presentation series of waypoints, since that template is for single waypoints (I make that about five times I've told you that, in the last few hours). Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 21:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't nominated for deletion for that, please reread the nomination. The point in this discussion was that it makes no difference where you intend the template to be used, as it can be used on any page with multiple coordinates, or actually on any page with coordinates, without it being vandalism as you suggest. All use of this template is misuse, as geographical information services on Misplaced Pages are centralised to GeoTemplate. --Para 22:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I made no mention of vandalism. Your initial assertion "This service can and will be added once the editprotected request is fulfilled" is conditional; and there is no guarantee that that condition will be met. As such, the deletion proposal should be dismissed, and made again if and when that condition is met, and if still appropriate then. geographical information services for single waypoints are centralised to GeoTemplate; it is not appropriate to do so for series or collections of waypoints (an issue you keep ignoring). Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 23:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I have explained this so many times on so many pages already, but for some reason you keep ignoring it. GeoTemplate exists to help people "find maps and data about the location", which covers locations defined as both single or multiple points. It makes no difference for the user, the KML service, or GeoHack whether the article has one or more points, they will all be converted. The implementation is only an admin's edit away, which you and you alone oppose. --Para 23:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I have explained this so many times on so many pages already, but for some reason you keep ignoring it. GeoTemplate exists to help people "find maps and data about the location", which covers only a single point. {{kml}} deals with series of collections of points. GeoTemplate begins by specifying a single set of coordinates. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 23:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Most of the listed services use the given coordinates, but this service link would use the given page name, which in turn is used to get the multiple points. The means of transfer is irrelevant. --Para 23:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It's certainly irrelevant to the point of my previous post, which you again ignore. GeoTemplate begins by specifying a single set of coordinates.. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 00:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

So? Most of the services use the given single set of coordinates, so of course the display is designed for the majority. That doesn't stop it from working with a page name to allow conversion of multiple coordinates. GeoHack won't pass the coordinates to the KML converter, but the page name where it can find the coordinates. Users on Misplaced Pages click on coordinates to find information about the location and its surroundings, and that's what they will get when clicking on a map service or a KML conversion tool. --Para 00:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

"Users on Misplaced Pages click on coordinates to find information about the location and its surroundings" - a list of junctions on a motorway running teh length of Great Britain is not the "surroundings" of one of those junction's coordinates; a list of impact craters around the planet is not the "surroundings" of one of those crater's coordinates. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 07:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom; this stuff needs to be centralized and organized (cf. merge discussions at other coordinates-related templates involving Andy Mabbett and Para; too much lone-wolfism going on here, with corresponding strife, instead of adding new functionality to existing templates.) — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 19:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC) ~~Actually Userspace; there is no reason to lilterally delete this, as it may be needed for Template:GeoTemplate integration.~~ — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 20:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC) It's been pointed out that there is no code needing to be merged, and that merge will be complete anyway with fulfillment of latest editprotected at Template:GeoTemplate. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 00:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- Which existing templates do you feel that this functionality could have been added to? Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 21:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- The template contains only links and no code. Andy has been spamming the same links all over Misplaced Pages , so there's no fear of them all disappearing. --Para 23:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  - There is no spamming; your accusation is unfounded, unjustified and unacceptable, Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 00:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete per SMcCandlish; perfectly summed up. This kml stuff is a good idea, but no need to rush it out without due circumspection. (It is not as yet user-friendly.) -- roundhouse0 20:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- There was "due circumspection". In what way is it "not as yet user-friendly", and why do you not instead propose improvements? Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 21:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep (merge if possible). I would suggest that Para and Pigsonthewing work together to try merge the functionality of the two of these templates into one. As far as favoring Google over NASA, Google is the 800# Gorilla, just as MS Windows dominates the OS market, we shouldn't stifle developer progress because something they developed runs only on the most popular software. —MJCdetroit 12:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not stifling developer progress, but centralising their work to the single place where it belongs and stopping it from straggling everywhere. No geographical service on its own is important enough to be placed in articles. I have prepared all the modifications for a merge to my sandbox, but Pigsonthewing alone keeps opposing them because they would make his own templates redundant. --Para 13:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Now you're resorting to dishonesty. I do not "keep opposing them because they would make own templates redundant", but because your proposal is badly flawed. I'd be quite happy for the templates I created (they're not "mine") to be merged and/ or made redundant, if the result is an improved service to our users. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 14:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The proposed modification offers improved service to our users. Your most recent attempt to stall the change is to claim that it doesn't "degrade gracefully", but you refuse to explain your reasoning despite numerous requests by a number of people. Can you please explain the flaws, and why they would be serious enough to warrant placing a template on all pages with coordinates, instead of just a single link on GeoTemplate? --Para 14:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

"...and why they would be serious enough to warrant..." Straw man. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

So, no explanation then, you are obviously opposing just for opposition's sake to keep using your "own" templates. --Para 16:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Kindly desist from telling such lies, here and in your edit summary. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 17:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply comment: It would indeed be great if these editors collaborated, but its been my experience that this won't happen. I attempted dispute resolution with them before, at Template talk:Hcard-bday#Merge dispute resolution, and, well, mediation doesn't work if one party will not cooperate, nor if both parties are at each other's virtual throats all the time. <sigh> This TfD isn't about that, however; it about template redundancy (WP:TFD deletion rationale #2). As Para points out, the merge is one editprotected away from being complete anyway. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 00:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep until Template:GeoTemplate gets updated. I still don't understand how {{GeoTemplate}}, which seems to be designed to link a single set of coordinates. {{Kml}}, which is meant to be placed until External links section, gives readers a great overview of multiple (even hundreds) sets of coordinates at once. Unfortunately, only Google services and NASA World Wind supports KML at the moment. eDenE 14:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep - This template will be quite useful for things with collections of geo points of interest - e.g. hiking trails, railways, rivers, mountain ranges. I agree that it probably shouldn't be hooked straight to Google in the long run, but Google seems to be the only map service which supports such groups of points --Ozhiker 15:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep - It is useful in its present form. If a similar yet different service needs support, then this can be generalized. This is useful and changes can be made when they need to be made, rather than deletion as a form of generalization. (SEWilco 19:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC))
Comment - This template both links to the multiple location display tool and provides a notice to the reader that the article has multiple locations which can be displayed. Each individual location is already linked to GeoTemplate, for display of individual points. GeoTemplate could be modified to provide this ability, although somehow it would have to know whether to manipulate a coordinate or an article name. Maybe KML's name should be changed, but it seems a label is needed to tell the reader that multiple location display is available. (SEWilco 21:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC))

Misplaced Pages is filled with articles that in addition to the main topic of the article handle subtopics that are either a part of the topic or related to it. There has never been any need to give self-referential hints to readers that the article provides more complete information than its name might imply; the readers can see that themselves after having looked at the article for a moment. GeoTemplate already lists services that span over a larger area than a single set of coordinates with their implied precision could be expected to have, such as information on roads, villages, communities, images or information from the general area, and so on. Currently they are all mixed together with the traditional map services, and a KML generator link would fit right in. GeoTemplate won't need any logic for coordinate or article name manipulation, as the link to be inserted in it after coord's proposed modification will only use the article name and ignore the rest. --Para 22:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Your first two sentences appear to have no relevance; your point about Geo Template is a red herring; it may cover single coordinates of low granularity, but it dos not cater for sets of different coordinates (please feel free to cite an example if you can; comparable with, say, List of impact craters on Earth, which has sites in South Africa, Australia and Mexico). Your last sentence is also a red herring; nobody is disputing that the mechanics of using links from Geo Template would work (they're only web links, after all, and would work just as well from the main page); just the appropriateness and usability. And the whole issue is still redundant, because what you're arguing for is not yet possible and may yet not come to pass. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 22:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep - the template is, at least, of some use and doesn't pass any of the criteria for template deletion - and the nomination seems to be based on a personal vendetta against Potw rather than the template, which is fine. Will 23:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

DELETE - This template is redundant, confuses users and deteriorates the article text! Adding the {{coord}} template is enough to fulfill the requirement. Don't creat lists inside Misplaced Pages where the information wanted can be spidered. There are already services like Stefan Kühn's, geonames.org's and Google Earth's which parse coord template out of the article text from the offline backup. Any realtime attempt only works for few items and else would put more unwanted burden on the productive servers. -- Geonick 00:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Please explain to what you believe this to be redundant, and how you think it confuses users. GeoNames and Google are irrelevant to this templates; they deal with single coordinates with a 1:1 relationship with articles; not sets of coordinates within one article. {{kml}} puts no burden on the servers; it simply passes the page's URL to external sites. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 10:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete, slightly beyond the scope of an encyclopedia. Usefull for only a small user set. I'd prefer an opt-in solution which could easily be created with a small bit of Javascript. --Dschwen 14:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Most of Wikipeida - and certainly most of the advanced features - is only useful for a small user set. As I've already pointed out to you elsewhere, a Javascript-based alternative would by inaccessible to some people, and thereby a breach of ]. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:KoreanWarCorr

Far too specialized to be of any real use; only two biography articles are included in the navbox, and it's only being used in one of them. PC78 15:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep, there were 23 journalists and as many photographers killed in the war - the template needs expanding (and I placed it in the other article, not sure why it was only listed in one), not deleting. Sherurcij 18:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Create articles first, nav templates later. PC78 18:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Subst and delete. If there are a pile of such articles at some point, then make it a template. That's a big "if" too; simply having been shot in a war doesn't make someone notable enough to support having a Misplaced Pages article. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 20:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Move to User space for now to allow for further development. Reintroduce only when the navbar is complete. - 52 Pickup 08:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:User HS

Unused userbox; redundant to other (better) userboxes such as {{User Korean}} and {{User South Korea}}. PC78 14:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom; actually how about speedy delete per G1, since it isn't even in proper English. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 20:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- That's not G1. This is definitely not "patent nonsense". The grammar error can be corrected, that is not the issue here. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 00:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete per nom, redundant. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 00:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete, agree should be speedied. Unschool 22:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- Definitely not. This doesn't fall under any of the speedy deletion criteria. Let the nomination run its course, there's no need to hurry. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 23:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Go player infoboxes

Unused templates; redundant to {{Infobox Go player}}. PC78 14:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom. eDenE 20:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
~~Merge~~ to {{Infobox Go player}}; some of these have language-specific parameters that need to be preserved. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 20:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC) Delete per explanation below. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 03:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Comment {{Infobox Go player}} already contains those language parameters. No need to merge. eDenE 22:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- If the merge has already been done, then delete - 52 Pickup 08:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 09:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Prime minister of South Korea

Large and ungainly template that is only used in two articles. As it is, this kind of information would be better suited as an article, and indeed it seems to be copied straight from Prime Minister of South Korea. PC78 12:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Great googlie mooglie! Delete per nom. The template completely obliterates the articles to which it is transcluded. The list in the related article is sufficient. Shalom 13:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete, but should be recreated and reformatted. Something should exist what this was intended to do. Unschool 22:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Various subpages of Template:WikiProject Korea

The result of the debate was deleted by NawlinWiki. Shalom 04:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

This all appears to be some kind of test for {{WikiProject Korea}} that predates a recent overhaul of the template, and as such is now obsolete. PC78 02:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Speedy delete as non-controversial maintenance (CSD G6). Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:13, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Some of them were used by old {{WikiProject Korea}}, but not any more. eDenE 16:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Speedy delete per G6. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 19:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Korean name templates

Unused redirects to {{Koreanname}}. — PC78 01:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep. There is nothing wrong with redirects, even unused ones. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete These templates has been replaced by {{Koreanname}} a long time ago. Since no one uses it, no need to keep it. There are also similar templates for deletion - July 31, July 29. eDenE 16:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Err, the whole point of a redirect is avoiding redundancy. {{Koreanname}} replaced it, but there is no need to delete the redirects. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  - But no there's no reason to keep them, either. PC78 16:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
    - Yes, there is. Deleting redirects without a good reason is a waste of time and useless, see WP:RFD and WP:PERF. When there's no real reason to delete, we default to keep. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 19:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

You might want to read the pages you are pointing people at. E.g. WP:RFD: "The default result of any RFD nomination which receives no other discussion is delete"; we do not "default to keep" as you insist. Especially in the template namespace, where unused redirects serve no end-user purpose, the way that Snooker World Championship does as a redirect to World Snooker Championship. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 19:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

No, but we do default to keep when the redirect makes sense and there is no specific reason to delete (when someone has pointed this out, obviously). True, template redirects are less useful than article redirects, but still, there's no reason to delete this. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 00:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

In what way do these redirects make sense then? They are redundant and obsolete, and you still haven't provided any compelling reason to keep something that would otherwise be deleted. PC78 00:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

They make sense in that it is not nonsense. "Infobox Korean names" would be a perfectly legitimate title for a template, but this time they've chosen for "Koreanname". There is no compelling reason to delete this redirect, either. When there is no reason to delete something, better keep it. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 03:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

You've just gone and voted to delete a bunch of similar redirects; aren't you contradicting yourself now? Are you seriously suggesting that "Template:Korean name image hanja" is a likely search term? PC78 19:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

My comments were actually primarily pointed at "Template:Infobox Korean names", which seems a logical name (should have said that explicitly). Delete the rest, FWIW. By the way, TfD isn't a vote. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 23:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply comment: Melsaran, I believe that you misinterpret the nature and purposes of template redirects. You are approaching this from an article redirect point of view that is simply not applicable here. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 00:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom and per WP:RFD; or send to WP:RFD for deletion, if anyone wants to be a process super-stickler. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 19:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- WP:RFD says "The default result of any RFD nomination which receives no other discussion is delete". This one did receive discussion. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 00:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply comment I see no material at RFD or elsewhere suggesting that an RfD which receives some discussion, but in which no salient points are raised in support of keeping the redirect, are kept by default. Actually wathing RfD suggests that this is not the case, especially with redirs in template namespace. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 00:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Nascar Racetrack

Replaced by {{Motorsport venue}}, a universal infobox template that caters for all types of motorsport venues. No longer used on any articles. Deletion discussed at WikiProject Motorsport. AlexJ 00:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom. "Redundancy bad, standardisation good!". {Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 15:17, 2 August 2007
Delete per nom as redundant. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 16:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete per nom. —MJCdetroit 12:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Obsolete vehicle. (SEWilco 18:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC))

Template:Sourcewatch

The result of the debate was speedy delete per CSD R1. Shalom 13:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

This was just a redirect to something that no longer exists SallyForth123 00:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)