Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 January 17
January 17
[edit]- 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 section.
The result of the discussion was delete after replacing with <sub>...</sub> or one of the other sub-related templates. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 09:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- Template:Semisub (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
This template is described as displaying subscript text that's not as "low-slung" as text displayed with HTML <sub>...</sub> tags. However, at normal zoom on my display, text using this template appears at the same height as text in sub tags, and at high zoom levels it is actually lower. Also, because this uses span tags and not sub tags, we lose the semantic meaning of the tag, which makes it harder for (e.g.) screen readers to give meaningful output to our readers. Plus, the inline CSS makes this fragile and likely to break on things like the mobile view. If we really want to display subscript text in a different height, we should probably do it in MediaWiki:Common.css for all sub tags, rather than trying to do it with a template. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 15:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - Per nom. This is an example of a template trying to micro-manage standard presentation of certain elements, overriding user-agent styling, or site-wide CSS. If there is a need to adapt default behaviour, it should be done in Common.css indeed. Note that core already has a rule for both
<sub>and<sup>to limit their lineheight in order to prevent surrounding text to be pushed away; there should be no need for this type of styling.-- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}}18:04, 17 January 2015 (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.
- 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 section.
The result of the discussion was delete as uncontested request after replacing with {{MedalistTable}}. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This template serves the same purpose as the much wider used Template:MedalistTable, the only differences being that numbered icons are in the header (not a profound difference at all) and the first field is marked as "Event" by default (an option on the other template). I propose this template be replaced by the near identical and more versatile MedalistTable template (using the "Event" name feature). SFB 14:34, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment if this template is to exist, it should NOT display "gold"/"silver"/"bronze", as most sports events and results do not use such terms. -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 05:11, 18 January 2015 (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.
- 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 section.
The result of the discussion was delete as redundant an unneeded Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Another redundant template about the chronology of a video game series that is not notable. It contains original research and game trivia (no third-party, reliable sources exist). The chronology of the Banjo-Kazooie video game series is so simple that we don't need it. Also, the template is practically redundant since we already have Template:Banjo-Kazooie series. --Niwi3 (talk) 14:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete, as this series is so small it does not need such a chronology template. --ProtoDrake (talk) 15:26, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - Completely unnecessary, per nom and ProtoDrake. Sergecross73 msg me 16:39, 17 January 2015 (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.
- 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 section.
The result of the discussion was delete as not helpful in understanding the subject matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martijn Hoekstra (talk • contribs)
The template contains original research and game trivia that is not encyclopedic. The chronology of the Perfect Dark video game series is not notable because there are no third-party, reliable sources that support it. The template also contains 3 wikilinks that are redirects and is practically redundant since we already have the useful Template:Perfect Dark series. --Niwi3 (talk) 13:48, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete: this template is not really needed, as the in-game chronology is easy to understand, does not need to be demonstrated with a chronology template, and only has three original games in the series, with all the other mentioned material being supplementary novels. --ProtoDrake (talk) 15:28, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - WP:GAMECRUFT. Sergecross73 msg me 16:40, 17 January 2015 (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.
- 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 section.
The result of the discussion was keep by clarification of a misunderstanding Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:28, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Subjective template. Who decides which referee is an ”elite referee”? XXN (talk) 13:15, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The UEFA Referees Committee makes the appointments[1] but there are allegations of corruption[2] so maybe that is what concerns you? Thincat (talk) 15:05, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - This a category of referee designated by UEFA to be in charge of the most important games and is not subjective. Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:29, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Ok. We can keep it. But i think it's necessary to put an reference link [for template content] in template documentation to prevent another proposal for it's deletion on the same reason. --XXN (talk) 20:37, 20 January 2015 (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.