| Revision as of 20:47, 29 March 2017 editUanfala (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users65,714 edits →Template:Adr: k← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 00:23, 6 April 2017 edit undoPrimefac (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators209,808 edits Closing discussion "Template:Adr" as relisted on 2017 April 6 (XFDcloser) | ||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| --> | --> | ||
| ==== ] ==== | ==== ] ==== | ||
| <div class="boilerplate tfd vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| ⚫ | * {{ |
||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's ] or in a ]).'' | |||
| A truly pointless template, trying to replace the widespread and largely well understood use of ]S with yet another template. | |||
| The result of the discussion was '''relisted'''<!-- Tfd top --> on ]. ] (]) 00:23, 6 April 2017 (UTC) | |||
| MediaWiki and Wikicode has a reputation for unfriendliness, true. Piped links are one aspect of this. But where Wikicode is unfriendly it is almost always when it presents more than one way of doing something, and flips syntax modes between them. This template makes things ''worse'', not better. ] (]) 20:05, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | * {{tfd links|Adr}} | ||
| : An example: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ironworks&diff=772861274&oldid=767352697 ] (]) 20:06, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's ] or in a ]).''</div> | |||
| :'''Keep''', unlike pipetricking, the template does NOT clutter text (and allows abbreviation use too) when typing sequences with addresses such as {{adr|Summit Hill|PA}}, {{adr|Carbon County|PA}}, ] {{bullR | |||
| }} <nowiki> {{adr|Summit Hill|PA}}, {{adr|Carbon County|PA}}, ]</nowiki> versus {{bullR | |||
| }} <nowiki> ], ], ]</nowiki>, and a host of other uses, such as {{adr|Broad Mountain||Lehigh Valley}} from <br/><nowiki>{{adr|Broad Mountain||Lehigh Valley}}</nowiki>, which without the repetition is far more easy to parse proof reading than <br/><nowiki>]</nowiki>. The amount of typing and confusion saved for the parenthesis and comma cases alone is tremendous. See the links and actual uses, not the simplistic reasons of the easy case cited by the nominator, who apparently feels he can spend my time for me. Let my tools be! // <b>]</b><font color="green">]</font> 20:17, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' I'm surprised this template wasn't created earlier, as it makes inputting piped links easier. As for its effect on readability, I agree with FrankB that it makes code less cluttered, but the nominator is also right that it adds to the complexity for novice editors to learn, to which I can also add that it will prevent the editor wiked form formatting the link. I'm not sure how these three things weigh against each other, but if it's judged that it's undesirable to have this template visible in the source code, then the solution will be not to delete it but to make it subst-only. – ] 20:47, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ==== ] ==== | ==== ] ==== | ||
| <div class="boilerplate tfd vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| ⚫ | * {{ |
||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's ] or in a ]).'' | |||
| Entirely redundant to ] and mostly made up of redlinks. ―]<span style="color:red">❤]☮]☺]☯</span> 07:13, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| * '''keep''', but remove the redlinks. at the time of this post, shows that the links are not replicated in ]. ] (]) 13:58, 29 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| The result of the discussion was '''relisted'''<!-- Tfd top --> on ]. ] (]) 00:19, 6 April 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | * {{tfd links|Concerns and controversies at the Olympics}} | ||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's ] or in a ]).''</div> | |||
Latest revision as of 00:23, 6 April 2017
| < March 28 | March 30 > |
|---|
March 29
Template:Adr
- 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 relisted on 2017 April 6. Primefac (talk) 00:23, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- Template:Adr (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- 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).
Template:Concerns and controversies at the Olympics
- 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 relisted on 2017 April 6. Primefac (talk) 00:19, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- Template:Concerns and controversies at the Olympics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- 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).