Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 November 23: Difference between revisions

Unnecessary and single-use template. Subst on main article and delete. Article does not have an article size issue that warrants a separate infobox template. Not to mention this was created back in May when the conflict began. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:08, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I cannot see the point of this. The “Quisling regime” was not a country, and Norway as a country has never, ever used the red and yellow/gold flag. Geschichte (talk) 22:02, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused bracket template. Gonnym (talk) 11:51, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused moving image template that should never replace the image in any of our templates. There is no reason for this distracting moving image to appear for the purge link (which is never the main feature of any page, but hidden tool). Gonnym (talk) 11:32, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is completely pointless in wikicode. If you want to create a newline, use enter. If you want to create a list, use a list template such as {{Plainlist}}. If you want to create a visual break that doesn’t violate the MoS, use br tags. Gonnym (talk) 11:26, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s a metatemplate created to facilitate code clarity and preserve indentation in complex scenarios. Normally it would not be used directly in a page. Compare writing

{{My template 1
	| foo = bar
	| {{My template 2
		| chop = chop
		| list = * One{{brwl}}* Two{{brwl}}* Three
		| carpe = diem
	}}
	| hello = world
}}

with writing

{{My template 1
	| foo = bar	
	| {{My template 2
		| chop = chop
		| list = * One
* Two
* Three
		| carpe = diem
	}}
	| hello = world
}}

—Grufo (talk) 06:48, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m completely fine with the second scenario. Even more so when you learn you can use comments to preserve spaces, which don’t require calling pointless templates that eat up the post-expand size. Gonnym (talk) 06:53, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the article title to appear with quotes is not supported by Wikipedia:Article titles. A discussion should have first been held to change the guidelines before creating these two templates. Gonnym (talk) 11:22, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. —WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:17, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• De-nominate due to invalid grounds. The two templates do not change the title of a page—which is what Wikipedia:Article titles talks about—but only the way titles are shown (there are plenty of similar templates at Category:Correct title templates). Moreover the two templates are currently well used and give visual clues to pages like “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” and “Si vis pacem, para bellum”. It should also be pointed out that version of Wikipedia:Article titles that did not yet contemplate these two templates (but did not ruled them out either) is from four months ago and has been recently resurrected by the nominator (I guess for the sake of arguing here). —Grufo (talk) 06:48, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  “Well used”. You’ve created templates, modified a policy page without any discussion, and then added them to those pages. That is completely backwards. Unless an actual discussion is held (RfC) which supports your vision, that vision should stay in your sandbox. Gonnym (talk) 06:55, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  As per Wikipedia:Editing policy, there is no requirement to discuss before editing policy pages, and as per WP:EDITCONSENSUS, “Wikipedia consensus usually occurs implicitly. An edit has presumed consensus until it is disputed or reverted.” Policy pages are not sacred pages, they simply have higher standards on the amount of “bold” changes that can be done. In this case however no changes at all in the policy were introduced, only a clarification was added, in order to point out what was still allowed according to the existing rules. —Grufo (talk) 07:15, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete wildly inappropriate and incorrect use of a template. This is borderline WP:ANI worthy actions by a brand new editor imposing their ideas on a large number of pages. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 07:38, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only exists for one show. Seems like useless navigation. CNMall41 (talk) 03:25, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the same reasons as given in the recent TFD for Use Singapore English. These should have been nominated at the same time. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:29, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If the “Use Singaporean English” template is gone, this has no reason to stay either. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 04:45, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Dgp4004 (talk) 10:43, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]