Pular para o conteúdo

Conheça Walt Disney World

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 April 11

< April 10
April 12 >

April 11

Template:Alex Kahuam

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 23:35, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only links to two films; does not meet guidelines at MOS:FILM#Navigation. DoubleCross (‡) 21:08, 11 April 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.

U.S. state election sidebars for those w/footers

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 no consensus. It's been three weeks, with rather heavy turnout, and I see no consensus. By my count, this is 6d 4k and one !vote to keep a single template, and with little policy-based guidance on when navboxes should be used instead of sidebars, I do not think there is a consensus either way here. Cheers, charlotte 👸♥ 05:08, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at former Delaware sidebar led to deletion, Alabama discussion last month led to consensus to have a larger nomination. Footers work better for election years, are used for every country rather than sidebars. I only nominated sidebars that already have a relative footer, but some of the footers likely need a decent bit of work to be brought up to the standard of other pages. Would need a decent bit of work if all deleted, moving templates to the bottom of the page for all pages that use them, and all that.

TLDR; footers are generally used over sidebars, sidebars that already have respective footers should be deleted. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 14:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will make sure to tag all pages and respective authors Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 14:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I largely agree with your points. However, footers are not visible on mobile browsers or the mobile app, while sidebars are. I think we should at least consider the ramifications of that before we delete all of them. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 14:57, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Had no idea about this, although it is still important to have continuity between all election articles. Lots of other article types, especially sports, also use footers. I wonder what the situation within Wikipedia is on having footers display on mobile, I assume its somewhere on a priority list Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:04, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to Template:Sidebar, sidebars aren't visible on mobile. Gonnym (talk) 19:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They can be deleted as long as the footers have all the elections listed that the sidebar has. Lertaheiko (talk) 17:10, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Was thinking that the ones that need it would be updated before complete deletion, since template deletion is a process Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 17:48, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, update them first Lertaheiko (talk) 20:10, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep these are useful for navigation. Some might find footers superior, but others find sidebars more useful. In articles where sidebars create no spacing issues, I think having both is great.
Some might find it "redundant", but I'd argue that it is useful to many readers to make articles as easily navigable as possible. "redundant" nav features simply make for a more easy experience for readers. SecretName101 (talk) 02:52, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, per SecretName101. We shouldn't be making it harder to navigate articles. On large articles, one has to scroll quite a ways to find the footer, if they even know it's there. On stubs like 2025 Saint Paul mayoral election, the sidebar is about all that's there to legitimize it as an elections page at all. I'm probably being too curmudgeonly. I'm just loathe to see content deleted for no reason other than consistency. TheSavageNorwegian 05:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as deleting these templates would make it harder to navigate, especially if an article is long enough such that you may need to scroll for some time before finding the footer. HarukaAmaranth 01:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I get the rationale, but it is significantly easier navigation and much higher visibility having something in the sidebar. And its not the only category of articles that have both sidebar & footer for some of the same info. In general I think there probably needs to be more holistic consideration to which information belongs in the footer vs sidebar. The comparison I come back to is the footers & sidebars used in military campaigns. Like Template:Gettysburg Campaign and Template:Campaignbox Gettysburg Campaign. These are excellent -- you get a good easy navigation option in the sidebar, but the footer contains much more robust categories and options. I like that model, and I'd encourage some thought in that direction with these. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 16:54, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Alabama
I find it quite helpful to find each resolution to amend the Alabama Constitution considering it is the longest and most amended constitution not only in the US but out of all countries. These pages could be linked on a single page like “List of amendments to the Alabama Constitution” or “list of statewide voting in Alabama”. Republic of Selmaria (talk) 01:26, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Republic of Selmaria this is proposed only for those with a footer, so there would still be an easy navbox, just located at the bottom of the page Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 01:44, 26 April 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:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Armies/OF/France (Maritime Gendarmerie)

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 23:34, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused NATO rank table templates. Gonnym (talk) 08:00, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym: seem to have put the same template twice (first two). Vestrian24Bio 10:45, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, removed. Gonnym (talk) 13:18, 11 April 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:Kentico CMS version

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 23:33, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused software version template. Gonnym (talk) 07:57, 11 April 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:CHSAA Black Forest

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 23:33, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and seems to have been replaced by the creator with new templates such as Template:Colorado Metro region schools. Gonnym (talk) 07:51, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all as well as Template:CHSAA, which is used in the below parameter of those navboxes. Almost done with all the new region-based navboxes. Love y'all Geracruzcolusa (talk) 19:03, 11 April 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.
fonte: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_April_11
Marcações: