Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 October 20: Difference between revisions

Propose merging Template:LDS Temple subpages with Template:Infobox LDS Temple.
Ok this is a REALLY weird one, so please read carefully… Every single transclusion of this template, has its own (single use) subpage. This means that if I want to update the information for the infobox on Asunción Paraguay Temple (for example) I have to go to Template:LDS Temple/Asunción Paraguay Temple.

It appears that this was done so that the data could be copied from the infobox to List of temples of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (and similar lists) with ease. This is just a terrible practice. I think with Wikidata being a thing, THAT should be the way to do this.

To be clear this will NOT be an easy transition, but I think it needs to be done. Maintaining Infoboxes this way is just terrible practice. These should all be replaced with actual calls to {{Infobox LDS Temple}} with the data passed to parameters on the article page, just like how literally every other Infobox is done. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:34, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One related blue link in the body. There’s not enough to justify a navbox for the subject. DB1729^talk 20:29, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. The alleged albums are not even mentioned at Akiva Schaffer, let alone notable enough to have articles. Not usable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:52, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn’t be creating a template for each country. Template:Current election is enough here. Gonnym (talk) 12:55, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The main point of this template is to explain to both editors and readers when those elected will take office, i. e. the day after the final results are declared. That stops overly eager editors showing the mayors-elect as having succeeded the incumbents, for example. I created the template based on this discussion. Schwede66 16:36, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge – While I agree with Gonnym that we do not want a template for each country, I don’t think {{Current election}} works here. What we need is a template that says This page is affect by the results of a recent election or similar. {{Current election}} (in its current form) is really for articles specifically about a certain election. I’d argue find a way to either merge the two, OR abstract this one out into a new tempalte that works globally, not just in New Zealand. How about a {{Recent election}} that would essentially combine aspects of {{Recent death}} and {{current election}}? —Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 09:48, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus to not use new format for this template. Stylesheet not necessary. MikeVitale 14:18, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think that peakbagger.com meets the Wikipedia definition of a reliable source since it allows user generated content (for example see here where the website states that the information was provided by a registered user). While the content is labeled as “provisional” before it’s approved by peakbagger.com admin, the site is run by one guy called Greg Slayden so it shouldn’t be considered a reliable source anyway. Wilderness trespasser (talk) 13:51, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep There was a very extensive discussion about the reliability of peakbagger at the Reliable Source Noticeboard in 2021, resulting in “no consensus”. My argument at the time was that peakbagger was used by other reliable sources. But I don’t think we should relitigate this here. This template should be kept because it is used on 5,300 pages and if we delete this template, it will leave thousands of pages with unreferenced data.

Instead, I think the original proposer should bring this up at WP:RSN and see if we can get consensus, and if the consensus is that it is not reliable, come up with a plan for how to remove the data. Simply deleting this template is not the way to do it. — hike395 (talk) 14:46, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both albums are non-notable redirects to the band’s article. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:22, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]