Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 September 12

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log

September 12

edit

Template:Houston SaberCats squad

edit
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 delete. ✗plicit 23:46, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Team has withdrawn from competition, so current squad template is no longer required Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:01, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom EvansHallBear (talk) 18:29, 12 September 2025 (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.

Template:Vanessa Redgrave sidebar

edit
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 delete. ✗plicit 23:46, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only three of links are Wikipedia articles about Redgrave. – MW(t•c) 15:30, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It also links to Quotes & Commons so that those links are clickable while viewing her filmography or awards, for example. The Oscar speech may just be a section on a page, but it's still also significant. The other two items are roles/characters, so their removal would be understandable. --Cinemaniac86TalkStalk 17:17, 12 September 2025 (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.

Template:BENGALIYEAR India

edit
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 delete. ✗plicit 23:43, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and created four years ago. All it does is display the year 1432. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:04, 12 September 2025 (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.

Template:The Voice Kids (Australia)

edit
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 delete. ✗plicit 23:42, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only one link outside of the main article. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 10:49, 12 September 2025 (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.

Template:Igor Mangushev

edit
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 delete. ✗plicit 23:41, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Out of eight articles in the infobox, those in the Background and Employers section are very broad and general, and Mangushev plays a small and undistinguished role in the topics they cover. In fact, Mangushev is not mentioned in the text of any of those articles, only being linked in some of them due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine navbox.

The two organizations he founded would belong in a navbox to him, but if they're what the navbox depend on, I don't think Wikipedia needs it. Both organizations are already widely mentioned and linked in Mangushev's article, and so is he in both's articles. I don't think this navbox improves navegability for readers in any way due to its small size and I don't think we need it. Super Ψ Dro 10:06, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Only two links are directly pertinent. --woodensuperman 12:18, 12 September 2025 (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.

Template:Charlie Kirk sidebar

edit
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 delete. (non-admin closure) QalasQalas (talk) 15:26, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough pages to justify a sidebar template. Easier to list all of these in prose in relevant articles. – MW(t•c) 08:29, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if there's an official guideline for how many related pages a topic needs in order to have a sidebar template, but surely the standard is higher than one notable family member, one notable mentor, a single TV episode, two organizations, and a page split from a section of their biography. Note that the only page listed in "ideology" that mentions Kirk in its prose is Trumpism, which lists him in passing as a critic of one aspect of Trump's foreign policy. – MW(t•c) 08:43, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait — Spotcheck of here shows some shorter ones, like Template:Vaughan Gething sidebar. Also, as you stated there isn't really a guideline and also WP:RUSHDELETE, template was just completed and could be expanded. Aside: for the future, please use |type=sidebar in your nomination. The nomination broke every page the template is on. I have fixed it, no worries. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 08:52, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the aside, was confused about why Kirk's page was temporarily broken.
That's a fair point, though it's worth mentioning Vaughan Gething is a former head of state. – MW(t•c) 09:02, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's a fair point, though it's worth mentioning Vaughan Gething is a former head of state I don't see the relevance? I just picked the first one I saw that was a similar length at random. Here's another random pull: Template:Vanessa Redgrave sidebar Are you asserting that Vaughan Gething is more notable than Kirk and thus more deserving? I don't think that would be a very productive use of time as a criterian... deciding who is the most notable of the lot. We struggle enough as is with the binary "is notable" or "isn't notable" as is. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 09:39, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Vaughan Gething is the elected leader of a nation. He is inherently more notable, yes??? Flatthew (talk) 09:07, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is why wikipedia lacks any credibility. 2600:4040:B30C:6B00:C4C8:A523:36AA:8B06 (talk) 11:11, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The head of state of Wales is the British monarch. Gething was head of a devolved government (somewhat equivalent to a state governor) for five months. But I digress. It looks like these sidebars just exist when somebody wants to make them, as with a navbox. I don't see a sidebar on JB Pritzker, despite it being a very comprehensive article, for example. Unknown Temptation (talk) 09:49, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait as you mentioned, there are lots of shorter ones. I don't believe length in a very new sidebar template has any say in whether it should stay or not. Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 04:38, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Most pages this is linked to are not pages that this template will be placed on. This fails WP:BIDIRECTIONAL and leaves for a very small amount of links in a prominent placed template. Iff there are enough links, a bottom navigation template can be created. Gonnym (talk) 10:14, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Ditto. WokeScientologist (talk) 11:52, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with deletion, there aren't sufficent pages for justify this sidebar. Wikitalovin1 (talk) 11:58, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree per above to Delete QalasQalas (talk) 12:01, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Insufficient pages for the sidebar. ɴɪᴋᴏʟᴀɪᴠᴇᴋᴛᴏᴠɪᴄʜ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/ᴄᴏɴᴛʀɪʙ) 13:03, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Ditto. 65.190.241.158 (talk) 08:10, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete An attempt to expand what does not need expansion. His article is the only article about him really.
--Cinemaniac86TalkStalk 15:56, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree with the nominator (@The Midnite Wolf), and with @Gonnym and @Bobby Cohn. This template a) duplicates functionality already covered by links in the prose of the articles listed and does not serve a broader navigational purpose, and b) includes links to articles of only tangential relevance to Kirk. This template functions more like a fan-made link collection created to make the subject look more important or central than they actually are rather than functioning as an encyclopedic aid, and does not meet Wikipedia’s standards for navigational sidebars. Willsteve2000 (talk) 18:00, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Gonnym. Phoeromones (talk) 18:28, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Gonnym. AndrewGarfieldIsTheBestSpiderMan (talk) 18:58, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No need for this in articles like Got a Nut. --Usp (talk) 19:06, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don’t delete it. It is good to hear what he preached and stands for- Jesus and his principles. 23.28.119.6 (talk) 00:05, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ILIKEIT isn't a valid argument. ミラP@Miraclepine 00:30, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather it not get deleted either. If for the only reason being everyone here on the 12th calling for Deleting it are just sad people. Thank you for speaking up. He will become bigger just because of the same ones trying to silence and delete him. Have a great day. 2601:C2:700:1A50:F08A:3F5A:50E7:67B4 (talk) 02:54, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait there are many with less Pantagraph (talk) 21:35, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I concur with Gonnym's point. There's not enough articles to justity it. Leecannon11 (talk) 20:44, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Did this even exist before his assassination? If not, I think sustaining this sidebar would be a case of us ignoring our rules because we got swept up (along with the public) because of a massive event, which really should not affect how we document events. GreenFrogsGoRibbit (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Gonnym. Also: This seems like a reaction to the recent news event and not how an impartial encyclopaedia would represent this organisation otherwise. Which means it's at best, problematic, and at worst, political. The sidebar doesn't even seem accurate by itself: It includes entities like Students for Trump that (when examined closely) really only have superficial ties to Kirk. So yes, delete.WikiMane (TP2001) (talk) 22:52, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; agree with above 140.141.4.65 (talk) 02:03, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Gonnym & PickleG13.
~eticangaaa (talk) 09:20, 15 September 2025 (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.

Template:Infobox professional wrestler

edit
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 keep. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:06, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox professional wrestler with Template:Infobox amateur wrestler.
Seems like these have enough in common that they could easily be merged to {{Infobox wrestler}} (currently a redirect). Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:17, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This has been proposed before and the overwhelming consensus was to keep them separate because they're nothing alike. There is zero overlap in parameters, as one is a character performance akin to theater, and one is a legitimate competition. Prefall 06:11, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They are not the same. Aiden4Real (talk) 06:57, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Two completly different fields. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 07:10, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Though both disciplines share a 'common ancestor', one is a legitimate sport and the other is a spectacle. The only parameters they have in common are those that both templates share with Template:Infobox person. MordecaiXLII (talk) 08:38, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Professional wrestling is very different from amateur wrestling. Stables, ring names, billed from, ect. it'd create a bigger problem, it's best they are kept seperate. Lemonademan22 (talk) 19:11, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per prior consensus and obvious difference in subject matter. 2600:2B00:9641:A400:642F:93CB:D7C9:405B (talk) 21:40, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose - two completely different forms of entertainment. "Amature" or freestyle wrestling is an Olympic-level combat sport. Professional wrestling is highly athletic theatre where participants "work" to entertain an audience. A merging of these infoboxes would imply that they are anything alike, which would violate relevant P&Gs about false information. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" (hihi) 02:40, 13 September 2025 (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.

Template:Infobox boxer (amateur)

edit
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 keep. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 07:27, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox boxer (amateur) with Template:Infobox boxer.
I see no reason these can be easily merged. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:13, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The amateur boxer template includes the boxer's club and coach as well as the medalstemplate all of which is relevant to amateur boxing but not professional boxing. The template infox boxer has the boxing record which is not relevant to amateur boxers as they have so many bouts and there is no comprehensive record of these to ensure accuracy. They should be kept separate. Shrug02 (talk) 08:23, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the same reason as @Shrug02 has stated. -PinoyBoxing11 (talk) 14:30, 14 September 2025 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_September_12&oldid=1312315882"