This is an archive of past discussions with User:Zackmann08. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi. Why did you delete the photo? I assumed this happened while you were inserting the infobox. Was it a deliberate deletion or an accident?Roundtheworld (talk) 11:50, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:L'Amour de la femme vénale.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:L'Amour de la femme vénale.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:The English Commentary of the Holy Quran.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:The English Commentary of the Holy Quran.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
I'm wondering if maybe you can help me with some AWB regex. I suck at it and I can't figure out how to write a replacement of templates. Is this something you can help with? --Gonnym (talk) 09:45, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
|series= -> |season_number= - actually now viewing more examples, |series= does not give always give a valid value. So this also should be taken from the title if possible.
Somehow get the country from the title -> |season_qualifier=
@Gonnym: short answer is yes, I got you... Longer answer, I'm working on another project right now so give me a day or so. I'm make this my next project. I probably won't use AWB however. I've got my own custom setup I like to use that is more powerful. Bottom line, we will get the pages converted. :-) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:41, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Ah ok. Then I'll ping @Alucard 16 who can give a more correct list of articles that should be moved (or an exclude list, whatever is shorter I guess). --Gonnym (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
I'll get to work on getting a list prepared for y'all! This sounds so much easier than having to covert over 300+ articles manually I can always go behind and fill in basic gaps like winner, runner-up etc. Alucard 16❯❯❯ chat?17:57, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Basically we don't need anything from the template on those pages. What we need are 3 parameters: |show_name=, |season_qualifier= and |season_number=. If you can take those from the article title, that would be great. So for Secret Story (French season 1) it would be |show_name=Secret Story, |season_qualifier=French and |season_number=1. The rest of template pasted below should be added to the article page empty. If not, |seriesname= does have the|show_name= value, but the others are bit inconsistent.
Make sure you use the correct parameters. Survivor articles use |num_survivors= and |film_start= and |film_end=, while BB articles use |num_housemates and don't use the film dates. Also, non-BB articles should use |num_contestants=. If this is a problem, just use |num_contestants= for all, as it would be the safer option. Also notice that a lot of the survivor ones have the image with the File prefix, and sometimes with alt information, if you can remove the prefix, and split the alt from the image, that would be great. --Gonnym (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Zackmann08! Great work. @Alucard 16: all have been converted, but there are some issues that should over time be fixed. The next/prev manual links are not correct for some. If the article has the correct parameters then there is no need for a manual next/prev and the template can handle it correctly. Also, some show names are linked, which they shouldn't be and some images have the File prefix. Whenever you see those, just make sure to remove them. --Gonnym (talk) 08:42, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:The Diagnosis of Love.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:The Diagnosis of Love.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
I see that awhile back you ported this over to a Module. It appears that you can no longer set customized colors per the documentation. I don't know Modules very much, but it looks like I should still be able to set customized colors if I use the correct parameter names. I think I figured out the proper syntax per my examples on my sandbox. However, that doesn't seem to be the case for this particular template. Can you please either update the documentation and/or fix the customized color options? You were asked about it on the bottom of the Template talk page, but you didn't respond. Thanks. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:42, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Hello, this is my first time writing to someone at Wikipedia. So I'm not sure if I do it right. I would like to talk to someone about Lake Chala, and you are the last wrote something. So it would be very kind, if you could contact me. My email adress is thomas@kili.africa Thanks very much, kind regards, Thomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.249.97.122 (talk) 08:20, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Notice regarding a user script
Hi. Recently, a request was made for someone to revise the User:Bility/convert24hourtime.js user script. I (DannyS712) took up that challenge, and have fixed the bug with the "thanks" button, fixed the bug regarding blocked users, fixed the bug regarding converting the times when examining a diff, and even added the feature to convert times when looking at logs. I have some more features planned, but I thought that, since you are currently importing Bility's script, you may want to know that a less buggy version is available at User:DannyS712/12Hours. This is intended as a one-time note. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 20:07, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:The Twelfth Card.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:Black Apollo of Science.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Black Apollo of Science.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Non-free book cover art being used in article about the book's author. Normally, a non-free book cover is allowed when its used for primary identification in a stand-alone article about the book in question; however, when the cover art is used in other articles, such as an article about the author, a much stronger justification for non-free use is typically needed per WP:NFC#cite_note-3. This book cover was originally used in The Flock (novel), but that article was merge into the author's article per Talk:The Flock (novel)#Proposed merge with James Robert Smith (author). Merging text content from one article into another does not automatically mean that the same can be done for non-free images since the jutsification for non-free use might no longer be the same.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Category:Articles using Infobox character with multiple unlabeled fields has some lbl/data fields that could be moved into one of the recently added fields. If you look at [1] you can see that a lot use "Affiliations"/"Affiliated with" which can be turned into |affiliation=; "Position" has |position=; "Armament" can be turned into |weapon=; "Residence" to |home=; "Home planet" to |origin=; "Title" to |title=. Might (I'm sure there are) others.
Any page you edit for the above, also change the redirect template to {{Infobox character}}.
Bonus #1 if possible - if you see a |first= that has a title in italics (title) then change it to |first_major=; if it also has a date in parenthesis after ("(1999)") then separate the date into |first_date=1999; If the |first= has quotes ("title") then change to |first_minor=. Anything else leave as I can't be sure if it is a major title or a minor title not correctly set.
Bonus #2 if possible - if the |series= has a {{no italic}} template, then change it to |franchise= and remove the template (see example Sara Lance).
Bonus #3 if possible - enter the parameters in the template order and with spaces similar to the usage example in the template.
Bonus #4 if possible - if a value has multiple entries separated by a <br> or <br /> tag, use {{Plainlist}} instead.
Is this something you can help me with? Once this pass is done, it will be much easier to see what custom fields are actually in use. --Gonnym (talk) 15:33, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
@Gonnym: getting started on this... Here is a look at the "unknown parameters" along with the number of times that parameter appears... Anything with only 1 I'm not worrying about. Color text is going away, but what about Episode? Can that map to something? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
hometown -> home; size (if this is for image) -> image_size; 1 -> is probably errors; sex -> gender; planet -> maybe origin?; voiceactor -> voice; inuniverse -> probably left over garbage from the video game infoboxes; other_names -> aliases; imagesize -> image_size; Name -> name; posting -> position maybe?; portrayed -> portrayer; weapons -> weapon; known relatives -> relatives; othervoice -> voice (i guess?); Last Appearance -> last; sortkey -> remove; kind of species -> species; Relationships -> significant_other (i guess?); homeworld -> origin; creators -> creator; bgcolour -> color; first appearance -> first; Nickname -> nickname; Team affiliations -> affilication; liveactor -> portrayer; sortname -> remove; played by -> portrayer; Full Name -> full_name; portrayed by -> portrayer; significant other -> significant_other; nationaliy -> nationality; signifcantother -> significant_other; relationships -> significant_other; wife -> spouse; craetor -> creator; place of origin -> origin; birthplace -> origin; nenotable aliass -> aliases; genre -> remove; significant others -> significant_others; childern -> children; bgcolor -> color; nationally -> nationality; voice actor -> voice; significanother -> significant_other; creater -> creator. I think I got them all. The rest leave as is. --Gonnym (talk) 20:20, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
@Gonnym: sounds good! I'm going to do a few iterations of this. Rather than trying to resolve everything in one go, I'm going to do few things at a time. I'll keep you posted. Thanks for the challenge tho! --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:41, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Leave it and everything else I didn't map. I need to figure out how to handle those. My hope is to eliminate the custom fields so really garbage parameters can't be added, but I first need to understand how they are being used. Once you clean this up, I'll be able to see it better. --Gonnym (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Just a comment: I noticed your replacement is adding the full infobox to the article (with most fields empty). Is this something you are removing in the next passes? --Gonnym (talk) 22:13, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Templates don't usually get added with empty fields as there is no reason to do so. It also invites future problems with editors trying to fill in fields that shouldn't be there. Also, the template has conflicting fields that should only one be added and you've added every option and finally, it makes the editing page longer for no reason. A template that has 5 fields of information now has over 20 (multiply that by the the amount of infoboxes you've added to list of character articles like the Babylon 5 one, which had an increase in 10,426 characters). If you don't plan to remove, could you not add them for future fixes please? --Gonnym (talk) 22:22, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
@Gonnym: ah gotcha. Didn't realize that. Ok. I'm now only filling in parameters that have a value. If you see any edits that you think need to be reverted, please go right ahead. I already reverted all the "List" pages. I see what you mean. HUGE diffs. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:27, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
@RexxS: wanted to make sure you saw my response there. You were correct. I should not have been making that change. Because it was just a parameter that didn't actually render the word color/colour on the page, I didn't feel it was a big deal. Obviously a number of people felt differently so I've corrected my script. But just wanted to make sure you saw my response. Thanks for pointing out my mistake AND thank you for doing it in a way that wasn't accusatory or insulting! I really do appreciate the fact that you were able to call me out for making a mistake without being rude about it. Thanks again. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:11, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping; I did see your response and I'm grateful that you saw the problem sympathetically. In the grand scheme of things, the issue was quite trivial, but every little kindness towards other editors helps us work collegiately. I appreciate that you were doing the job to help out another editor in the first place. Regards --RexxS (talk) 21:58, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Material Concerns.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
a question similar to; Template:Episode list - Errors
I have a side question, similar to the above. At The Morose Mononokean as the t.v. show is airing. when adding the items to; Template:Episode list or Template:Japanese episode list. When applying the |RAltTitle=, and next to the item has; (肢簾). (As shown in "season 2".) But when I took out some of the word set to; (肢簾), from the sand-box. It displays as the same with-out the item {{Nihongo}} being there.
So in the future, does it matter to use (肢簾), (肢簾), or t.v. shows that has kanji. But doesn't have a ruby character. When adding the kanji to any t.v. show that are slowly using, Template:Japanese episode list and being changed into; the way how, Template:Episode list is used? Tainted-wingsz (talk) 23:38, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Oh? It's just up to an user's preference? At first I thought, it was. When making two similar templates into one, O.k. we'll follow that now? Then some times an ip might not know about it. As much for about a day or so. Until then there might of been a concern of edits by an ip and their confused by that. Like ip adds everything there to an episode, but the page/ article is giving off an error when using an episode template, etc. And later some one else fixed it, after they edited. (Which was my concern.) Tainted-wingsz (talk) 00:48, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
@Tainted-wingsz:, in the new version of the template, which should be live soon, you shouldn't be using any language template. Instead you'll have |TranslitTitle=, |NativeTitle= and |NativeTitleLangCode= which you should use for non-english titles. --Gonnym (talk) 10:18, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Ah? o.k. then soon. Is there one for, if an episode listing has more than one name. Like at Gamers!, it has 11 episodes, where it only has one episode title. But at episode 8 it has two names to its episode title? Or at Ueno-san wa Bukiyō, where it uses two episode titles. Then from then on, the new info/ template will be addressed, when everything is added. Tainted-wingsz (talk) 15:28, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ozflashman: first of all awesome username... Second... DAMIT!!!! Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I'm trying to see if I can fix it at the Module level first (see this thread) but will make sure these edits get fixed. If I'm correct, there is no data that has been removed... The only issue is that "TBA" is not displaying, is that correct? The reason I ask is that if that is the only issue, I don't feel the need to immediately revert the edits. If however, my edits actually stripped data from the pages, then I feel different. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:53, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
You should wait with that a little bit more. I'm almost done with a rework of the module with built in |NativeTitle=, |TranslitTitle= and |NativeTitleLangCode= parameters in order to both support Japanese and other languages, but also to show them correctly with the {{lang}} template. --Gonnym (talk) 18:24, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
It's pretty much completed, just two other module dependencies need to be moved from sandbox to live, and there is one issue I've posted that I'd like to get an answer for. Hopefully I'll move it all this week. You can test it out and let me know if you find any issues - Module:Sandbox/Gonnym/sometest3. --Gonnym (talk) 19:11, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
I've promoted it to sandbox version and placed a comment on the talk page. I'd like to give people a week to respond, so if there are no issues until the 22nd, I'll make it live. --Gonnym (talk) 00:04, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
The documentation does indeed need to be updated, which I have a completeish version in a sandbox. I'll move it tomorrow as I don't have a lot of time today and I'd like to be available in case a bug turns up so I can fix it right away. --Gonnym (talk) 14:58, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
While moving it, I encountered some bugs that I didn't notice while not on the article mainspace. I've since fixed those but as Alex asked I place an edit request so someone else can verify, I'm still waiting for someone to verify the code has no errors. --Gonnym (talk) 11:30, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
The merges be a lot quicker if you filed an AWB request to update the templates. Also, is there a reason why you're updating {{Japanese episode list}} despite the current edit request and discussion going on at Module talk:Episode list#Sandbox version update, started four days ago, for edits that were made primarily to address the issue of the Japanese episode list merge and implement the correct parameters into the module, so that the parameters you're using don't need to be used? Does this mean that once those edits are implemented, all of your merge edits for that template will have to be reverted? -- /Alex/2101:20, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
@Alex 21: I don't follow what you mean regarding the AWB request. Do you mean for updating all the transclusions or for updating the templates themselves? If you could elaborate I'd appreciate it! I'm all for anything that will make the process easier. As for {{Japanese episode list}} that is a good point. I will hold off until that discussion is resolved. The edits I have made will not need to be reverted as they will all work. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:09, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
@Gonnym: this is based off of the merge of Template:Infobox Space:1999 character. But more than that, it is a very unusual practice to restrict the use of 2 parameters to be mutually exclusive like that. For plurals it makes total sense... For example {{{nickname}}} vs {{{nicknames}}}, but I see no reason to restrict the template to only be allowed to display either position OR occupation. What is the benefit of limiting it? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:12, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
The reason we have those two is because some editors wrote occupation and other position. A lot of times, these were the same exact thing. A few occupations where not even jobs ("best friend of character") or position being used the same title. If you saw an article using both, I'd like an example to see if it's valid. There is no reason to change the infobox if there was no actual uses. --Gonnym (talk) 19:15, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict)@Gonnym: HA! Ok you make a good point. I will defer to your judgement and not object to a revert. I think the change is an improvement, but not one I'm super passionate about if that makes sense. You've done a lot of work on this template. Not that you WP:OWN it, but you are a lot more knowledgeable about the use cases so I defer to you.
On a related note, while I got you, I'm curious what the benefit is to deleting the redirects? Personally I like having those redirects... It makes it easier to find the template I'm looking for... For example, I recently merged a bunch of templates to {{Infobox sports draft}}. If I wasn't familiar with that template, it is nice to be able to do a search for "Template:infobox NFL" and see {{Infobox NFL Draft}}. Now that redirects me to the proper template, but having that redirect is helpful. I think the same could be applied to {{Infobox Tolkien character}} for example. Is there a reason you feel strongly that they need to be nuked? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:21, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Regarding the infobox change, I looked at all 11 pages you changed, none of them have either occupation or position. Are you sure you saw one here? Regarding the redirects, I personally don't believe in template redirects with how Wikipedia works. They both serve as a link in a discussion like this, but also as actual usage in an article. I believe that in the main-space only the real template should be used and anything else is just lazy editing. Template redirects also have a hidden disadvantage that a lot of editors overlook. If you want to access a parameter from another template, you have to supply the template name. If you are using a redirect instead of the template name, it won't work. There are not of templates like this atm, but nevertheless, this is an issue. Also, some template redirects don't follow the infobox naming conventions (of starting with "Infobox") and others are just ambiguous "Infobox Tolkien" what does that exactly mean? Is that for the person? The books? The films? Characters? Locations? --Gonnym (talk) 19:32, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
@Gonnym: Regarding the first thing, I've gone ahead and reverted the edit. You got me convinced. Regarding the second, I think this is a much broader discussion that just you and I aren't going to resolve. I'm not saying that your points aren't without merit, I just have a different point of view. I'm wondering if you can expand on If you want to access a parameter from another template, you have to supply the template name. If you are using a redirect instead of the template name, it won't work. I'm not sure I'm understanding what you mean... Are you saying that (for example) {{convert|1=123|2=km}} and {{conv|1=123|2=km}} wouldn't produce the same result? (note that {{Conv}} redirects to {{Convert}}).--Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:39, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Example:
{{Template parameter value|Charmander|Infobox video game character|1|firstgame|1}} ->
@Gonnym: first of all...WTF?!?! {{Template parameter value}} exists?!?! THAT IS AWESOME!!! No idea that was a thing.... Now that being said, to me the issue you identified is an issue with {{Template parameter value}}, not an issue with redirects in general. Again, this is a much broader discussion that you and I alone are never going to solve. Something for a much larger RFC. You make some really good points, particularly about redirects that don't follow proper naming conventions (don't get me started on {{Chembox}} vs {{Infobox chemical}}) or are just too vague.
Can I also say, thank you for having a respectful disagreement with me! All too often disagreements on here turn into shouting matches. Nice to be able to have a respectful conversation with someone whom I disagree with.--Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:47, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, nice templates like these are not advertised at all and you just stumble upon them. I'm not sure a template can fix this to be honest. I've spoken to two very experiened template/module creators, one helped me with my own module code and the other checked it when I was told it could probably be changed, and it just can't. In my situation I supplied a list of template names, but that solution is just a hack, as any new redirect not on that list won't work. And that was for a specific topic. A generalized template like Template parameter value can't have a list like that. But yeah, you asked why I delete them, that is the reason :) And believe me, we aren't even close to an argument, this is just a discussion. I try not to enter too many arguments as even if I "win" it, it drains all my life force away. --Gonnym (talk) 19:52, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
I wish that was always the case. If you could see the tagging I did this week for talk pages that had their parent page deleted, you'd see that not every admin actually does a complete deletion. --Gonnym (talk) 22:35, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Perl Cookbook.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Perl Cookbook.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Since you were the last to change the template, I presume you have the rights... Nickname is a value field in the template, but is *not* in the list of fields at the bottom, so usage causes the articles to go to the Unknown parameter category.Naraht (talk) 22:58, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
End result should probably be that, yes. But it takes time and there are a lot of editors that for one reason or another feel as if their sub-subject or template must be its own thing. Keep an eye out for template discussions at WP:TFD so you can add your voice to any future discussion. --Gonnym (talk) 11:09, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
It's a slow process as history has shown that when you nominate a group of templates together, editors automatically oppose. So it has to go one by one. Regarding the "Infobox" prefix, that is a naming convention on en.wiki which must be followed. --Gonnym (talk) 07:46, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Actually, I didn't notice the problems with the templates before the changes were made today. I'm not sure whether or not the template issues were caused by one of the changes described above or by someone altering another template - either way, it looks like we have to delete these parameters from all of the affected articles to remedy this problem. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 05:11, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Are you going to update your script to do another pass of the episode lists you converted to the intermediate template (AltTitle, RAltTitle) to convert them to the new pattern (TranslitTitle, NativeTitle)? Some of these episode lists also have the "table-layout:fixed;" error. For example, Rail_Wars! --dasime (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
It looks like ShortSummary is displayed only if the page title matches the first unnamed parameter. Look at the function called "isOnInitialPage" in the module. I'm guessing a bit here, but if I paste the episode lists into Special:ExpandTemplates and change the Context title to "List of Ojarumaru episodes", the ShortSummary displays. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:49, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
The template used {{Episode list}} but supplied a value for |1= which was incorrect - "List of Ojarumaru episodes" instead of "List of Ojarumaru episodes (season 3)". I could probably optimize the code so that it disables input from |1= if that template is used. --Gonnym (talk) 13:19, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
That explanation makes sense, and is consistent with my testing in a user sandbox. The documentation needs to be fixed, it seems to me. All of the example templates show |1=, but I do not see a mention of how that unnamed parameter works. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:12, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Well, the doc isn't wrong though - it says The title of the article the table is located in. - List of Ojarumaru episodes wasn't the title of the article the table was located in. That said, I'm checking to see if I can remove this parameter altogether. I'm pretty sure it can (as I can get the page name without user input) but I'm just verifying this. --Gonnym (talk) 14:16, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Got an answer that it was like how I thought. I'll propose a change so no user input is needed once the current discussion on the module page finishes, as that is very heated, and don't want to get it derailed. --Gonnym (talk) 14:53, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
@Gonnym and Jonesey95: holy crap, I take a 10 hour break and come back to 15 new messages! lol. I managed to get the transclusions I needed fixed, but I do think some additional documentation could be helpful. I'll let you all figure that out... Thanks for the info! --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:14, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Problems with upload of File:The Rushdie Affair- The Novel, the Ayatollah, and the West.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:The Rushdie Affair- The Novel, the Ayatollah, and the West.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
I noticed you've added to your todo list to add a short description to the character infobox. I've been stuck on this for a while now as I'm not sure how we can get a good description.
I've got this so far:
Fictional <fiction type> - "Fictional character"
(problematic) Fictional <fiction type> in a <media type> - "Fictional character in a television series" / "Fictional character in a film" / "Fictional character in a comic"
OR: Fictional <media type> <fiction type> - "Fictional television series character" / "Fictional film character" / "Fictional comic character"
(problematic) Fictional <fiction type> in the <media type> <series> - "Fictional character in the television series Lost" / "Fictional character in the film Fight Club" / "Fictional character in the comics X-Men"
OR (for comics) - Fictional <fiction type> in the <series> comics" - "Fictional character in the X-Men comics"
OR (for comics) - Fictional <fiction type> in <comic publisher> comics" - "Fictional character in DC comics comics" (last "comics" can be omitted if it's part of the publisher name if wanted).
Fictional <fiction type> in <series> - "Fictional character in Lost" / "Fictional character in Fight Club" / "Fictional character in X-Men"
Fictional <fiction type> in the <franchise> franchise - "Fictional character in the Arrowverse franchise" / / "Fictional character in the Harry Potter franchise" / "Fictional character in X-Men franchise"
The problem I have is with "<media type>" as we don't have that information from the template. It might be able to get from searching for the page used for <series> and then seeing what infobox is being used, but I'm not sure yet. Any thoughts?--Gonnym (talk) 10:51, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for helping! However, I just reverted your merging because you used wrong table format. You should use a right table format when you performed a right table format. Best wishes Hhkohh (talk) 01:22, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
@Hhkohh: your comments don't make any sense.. You should use a right table format when you performed a right table format what is wrong with the format? The TFD clearly said to merge the three templates, so that is what I did. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:20, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Material Concerns.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
First I would like to thank you for adding images to articles but I needed to draw your attention to an error. You added a book cover to Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula but the cover you added is clearly The Perils of Sherlock Holmes and not Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula even though the file name is Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula.jpg. I assume there was an error with uploading the correct image with the correct filename. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 19:15, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Regarding your edits to Template:Infobox comics character, is there anyway to restore the default image width to 250 pixels? Your edit seems to have triggered automatic image scaling, resulting in extra negative space around the image and poorer image quality. Thank you.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:16, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
I also set the max image size (width) to 250px, per the documentation. I did not attempt to replicate the complicated code that was setting the max height to 450px, so I deleted that note from the documentation. I expect there may be a couple of very tall images somewhere in articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:09, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello. I follow the discussion on the merging of episode patterns of TV shows with a common television episode template. I propose to add custom parameters to the general template, which the participant himself calls and fills.
In the blank for copying the template will look like this:
{{Infobox television episode
|
|
|
|
|
|
|parameter1 = Here we call the parameter
|parameter value1 = There will be a filling of the named parameter
|parameter2 =
|parameter value2 =
|parameter3 =
|parameter value3 =
|parameter4 =
|parameter value4 =
|parameter5 =
|parameter value5 =
}}
Custom parameters are the devil's work. They are an open-ended problem, which lets editors add unnecessary and un-encyclopedic parameters to the infobox. The only reason that the various character infoboxes has them, as that some Good Faith, but ultimately misguided editors, added these over the years and now it is too hard to remove them. If a parameter is needed for a TV episode, it should be proposed in that template's talk page and get the consensus to add it. --Gonnym (talk) 12:33, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
With reference to your close Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 February 7#Template:Ahnentafel-tree. If you read the conversation you will see that the user who proposed this had made a simalar proposal less than a year ago (when it was rejected) and gave no new reasons when reproposing. All three users who expressed an opinion opposed the proposal so how did you come to the close summary that there was no consensus?
"If you leave me a message here on my talk page, I will answer your message here by pinging you." I am looking forwards to you pinging me. -- PBS (talk) 09:49, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
If you are going to make administrative decisions (close discussions and analyse opinions, or roll over a discussion) then you ought to be willing to explain your decisions. -- PBS (talk) 17:54, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Ashokavadana.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Quick comment about deletion of links for TfD templates
Hey, quick comment. When you delete a template, make sure you also check the pages it's linked at. I found tons of templates, especially infoboxes that were up in TfD that weren't removed from pages like Wikipedia:List of infoboxes and others (and check for unknown categories). It's much easier to remove them when you know what to search for. --Gonnym (talk) 21:43, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I never said it was a requirement, but was a friendly reminder. I already do that, but as I said, I can't delete what I don't know to search for. --Gonnym (talk) 22:27, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
If a template has transclusions, it should be listed in the "To Orphan" section of the Holding Cell rather than the "To Delete" section. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 19:48, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
@Primefac: I really appreciate it! In the future, if I screw up, its helpful if you can show me which template just so I can better understand my error. Truly do appreciate the message! One question... If a template has been set for deletion but has transclusions on talk pages... what do we do then? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:43, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Special:Diff/883180935. I would guess a misclicks, though they mostly still had transclusions in the user space. Ideally if a template is supposed to be orphaned and it's still in use on talk pages (and it's not a talk-page template) it should be commented out so that the history is still there. Primefac (talk) 18:46, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
I got a sandbox version ready for {{Infobox fictional race}}here. Some fields with duplicate or bad names I didn't support but still work, this is so nothing breaks until you convert it, then that part of the code can be removed so they won't work anymore. I also removed |actor= and replaced it with |members= as listing every actor who played a character of that race will make the infobox gigantic and useless, the notable member field from the Doctor Who template makes more sense. --Gonnym (talk) 11:07, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Mapping:
founder => iu_creator
founded => iu_created_date
kind => type
official_language => language
homeworld => home_world
firstapp => first
races => sub_races
footnotes => removed
actor => removed
flagship and anthem => removed as I couldn't find these even used
I've updated the template with documentation and cleaner code - something that can now actually be supported. While doing it, I've deprecated bad parameter names and unused parameters. I've also gone and added some of the merged parameters. If you don't have time it's not a problem. These infoboxes had other unsupported parameters for years without anyone caring, so a few more won't be a problem. --Gonnym (talk) 19:56, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
References should usually not be in the infobox. That means that the piece of data is unique to it, while the infobox should be a summary. In addition, this ref is not connected to anything. Placing it in the ref section is the correct route here. --Gonnym (talk) 20:11, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Make sure that any redirect is also changed to the actual template name.
Noticed your change at the race infobox, don't ignore my sandbox changes. Add what you need to that then convert when ready Gonnym (talk) 00:41, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
@Gonnym:{{Infobox Tolkien character (2)}} had only 1 use, I just converted it and redirected. No need to waste time with a TFD unless someone decides to revert the change. With regards to {{Infobox animanga character}}, I'm on the fence. The template already is a wrapper for {{Infobox character}} and has a large number of uses. What is the benefit here of merging the two? Seems like keeping it as a wrapper makes it easier for people? Not 100% opposed to the idea but curious as to your thoughts. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:44, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Because this wrapper adds no value; it is exactly the same infobox. The only thing different is that they changed the parameter names of the data# parameters. Also, that template specifically cannot work with TemplateData as it has parameter names with spaces Wikipedia:TemplateData/Tutorial#Completing_the_TemplateData_information. Also, why did we replace other templates then and not just create wrappers? --Gonnym (talk) 20:59, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
@Gonnym: So my 2 cents is that if you have a LARGE number of pages (here 300+) with the same custom data, it is helpful to have a wrapper to keep them consistent. That being said, you make some good points. I'm neutral on it. I definitely think it is worth bringing to a TFD, but I will probably abstain as I am neutral on the matter. If it passes, happy to tackle the merge! --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:30, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Millicent Min, Girl Genius.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Thanks for uploading File:Private India.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
@Pigsonthewing: you may not agree with the decision, but that isn't grounds for mandating that I reverse it. The arguments in favor of deletion made perfect sense to me, while the one argument against did not. In the future, please don't come and simply accuse me of errors. I know full well that TfD is not a poll. Had you simply asked me to relist the discussion, I would have been more than happy to. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:16, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Dorothy Rabinowitz.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
@Gonnym, Nigej, and Tom (LT):, you each took part in the volleyballbox TFD so pinging you here. I was getting ready to start the conversion, I even wrote my script, but then started having second thoughts. I don't really like the way either of these two templates works. {{Volleyballbox2}} has a better formatted output, but I hate the way that it uses so many <br> statements to format things. Then {{volleyballbox}} doesn't really clearly show who won which set, etc. I was kicking around the idea of actually redoing the entire template as a module... having things like {{{team1_1}}}, {{{team2_1}}} (for team 1 set 1 score and team 2 set 1 score). Then I could automatically bold whichever team has the higher score. Do you guys have any thoughts on the matter? I just feel like if I'm going to take the time to merge the two templates, I might as well make them actually look good. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:33, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
My opinion - as long as the current functionally is kept, then if you have a better version that works better in terms of wp:accessibility and other best practices, go for it. From looking at the templates, it seems they are using a table and doing a mix of a layout table vs a data table which is not recommended by most (all?) accessibility guides (as an example), so if you're vision fixes that, even better. --Gonnym (talk) 20:45, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Regarding the module code - your tables are missing column and row scopes (the same issue the previous code had). This table is not a layout table (even if it tries to appear as such), but a data table. So your code needs to work to present it as such. I've written a mockup below using plain wikitable code. Now while the template code looks more visually pleasing maybe, it just fails in accessibility, so the question is, as always, what do we go for? (also, just a side-comment, the time the match was played and the stadium it was played in seems a bit trivia, but that may just be me).
I'm sure there are other optional designs (but I don't know them), but sometimes a simple table does the job. The other table will be read as "STADIUM, DATE TIME, Team 1, 2 – 3, Team 2, Attendance: ATTENDANCE" in a screen reader and the use of the br tags to make rows in the set_right_info() function is also against the guidelines. --Gonnym (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
This is a little above my pay grade but initial reaction has me wondering how the vertical layout would play in a whole tournament's bunch of scores. If you filled out the 2018 FIVB Volleyball Women's World Championship, for example, with that for each match it would be pages and pages in length. Sorry if that's not what you are working on here. Phuebi (talk) 01:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Since the 'Sets' data is the 'thickest' of the data, I think it looks better in the middle rather than on the right end. Correct me if I'm wrong, but using column headers is for accessibility, right? That will likely cause one to have to scroll the page horizontally when it's the "De La Salle Junior Lady Archers" vs "FEU-Diliman Baby Tamaraws" (not just China v USA). Team names as column headers is redundant anyway. "Score" as the 'Set' column header is odd. Keeping the thing to three columns is visually more pleasing than nine columns, and I feel like a jerk critiquing your hard work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phuebi (talk • contribs) 22:10, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in response.I would too prefer {{Vb res 51}} or {{Volleyballbox2}} in the usual case,but I understand the discussion is on the vertical Volleyballbox.I feel that the details of the match like Stadium,
Time,Attendance,Referees all could come in the first column.Since the team names have come already,is the match column really required ?. As Phuebi pointed out "Score" doesn't look apt as the column header of 'Set'.Imho,even eliminating that column may work,as the absence of set numbers may not affect the comprehensiblity as seen in {{Volleyballbox2}}.That would leave with you four columns and if you take the source/report to the first column then three.Here's a partial Mockup from the test cases.Hope my inputs could be of any use to you.
The above table looks good (small issues: missing row column, and the source column can be smaller). I personally have a problem with the Match info column from the sandbox, as that basically is a counter-design. Instead of placing the info correctly into column, it's all placed in a single column. That isn't really how table's work. --Gonnym (talk) 20:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
That's your call. You could also just merge the 2 volleyball templates like in the discussion and leave it for someone else. Sport templates are less about technical implementation and more about unnecessary drama, not something I like to get into. --Gonnym (talk) 20:50, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
I know, and I agree. Those templates are not good. Take Template:Football box for example, I'm pretty sure that goal time and penalty info text size are much smaller than 85%, maybe even the player names. But as I said, this won't be an easy sell, so good luck with that. --Gonnym (talk) 20:55, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Infobox settlement - 5000+ edits - maybe AWB
Except for one template all redirects have been replaced, i.e. the non-wrapper articles directly link to Template:Infobox settlement.
The only template left is Template:Infobox Settlement (uppercase). All 6724 articles that use this redirect have been created between 3 July 2008 and 9 April 2009. [2]
The good news is, that ca. 5000 are about villages in Poland and would need a fix anyway, e.g.
Hi Zackmann08. Thanks for all the work that you do at TfD. When you close a discussion as delete, could you please verify that there are zero remaining trancslusions before tagging templates for speedy deletion? Thanks, FASTILY00:46, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
@Gonnym, Steel1943, Tom (LT), MarnetteD, and Pppery: There has been a recent uptick in the number of TFDs related to only one transclusion. As you may know there has been some debate in the past about whether this alone is enough to justify deleting a template. My personal opinion aside, I wanted to see if you all had any strong feelings about doing an RFC? I was going to write one up and formally file it to adopt a clause in Template namespace guidelines. Before I write it up, just wanted to see if you all had any initial thoughts/reactions. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:34, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
It would be worth assessing what the current attitude is. It might be the same but it is also worth seeing if consensus has changed. MarnetteD|Talk02:27, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
To each his own, I suppose, but as I go through the Template space fixing Linter errors, I wonder why editors appear to be so hot to delete single-use templates when so many zero-use templates (aside from those that should be substed) exist. I know, OTHERSTUFF, but if your goal is cleaning up the place, I would think that the hundreds or thousands of zero-use templates would be worth going after. (FWIW, I recently substed a straightforward single-use infobox template into an article; it was clearly the right thing to do.) – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:34, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Completely agree with Jonesey95 last I checked there were 80,000 or so unused templates. I just couldn't find a way to extract groups of them them for grouped discussion and as I couldn't be bothered to copy and paste 80,000 times (I am a volunteer after all!) gave up. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:56, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
How hard would it be to get a wikilinked, sortable list of unused templates that are not marked as subst only, or perhaps a list that fits Zackmann08's proposed CSD criteria? We could look at that list together to see if we could find groups of templates to nominate. I know that nominating 100 templates all at once doesn't always go over well, but if we had a good rationale, we might be able to make a few of them work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:21, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes, but the report includes pages and pages of unused redirects to templates that are used. The proposed CSD criteria don't say anything about redirects, and redirects are cheap and often useful. DAB pages should also be excluded from the report, I think. The report contains templates like {{Typo Team Medal}}, which is a subst-only template (identified as such in the template's documentation) and is used, as can be seen at User talk:Spazure and other pages. I was hoping for a narrower report that shows the real extent of the problem. If there are only 1,000 or so truly unused templates, we can take them to TFD over the course of a reasonable period of time. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:39, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
@Zackmann08 I think a carefully crafted rationale would be great. Also, it would help test community attitudes about standardising some of the common template use criteria. For example - as an aside - I wish templates > 5 years with no use could be speedily deleted, it wastes so much air time to have discussions about such things (in my opinion)
On the other hand, contrary to Pppery I would be more supportive of a narrower scope for single use template deletion. Templates to me serve the primary function of improving the reading experience and the secondary function of improving the editing experience, so I'm not opposed to templates used on single articles per se, if they are really complex. In my experience the complex templates have usually been hived off the parent article years before because they have complex legacy wikitext that, in my opinion, would deter editing (certainly would for me). I'd however energetically support something about single use templates with standard wiki markup codified as a reason for deletion. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:56, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Simple single-use templates can probably be converted, but as others have said, it depends on what that template does. As Jonesey said though, the real problem is the 0 used templates. If we can get this type added to a Speedy deletion category, that will have move stuff way faster. Atm, it just clutters the deletion process with a very predictable outcome. --Gonnym (talk) 11:18, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Seems a very light consensus at best based on the amount of participants? Was this even placed as a RfC for wider input? --Gonnym (talk) 17:44, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
@Jonesey95: I 100% agree that zero use templates need to go. My only point is that when you XFD a zero use template, you never get objections. With single use templates, there are objections gallore, so it would be nice to have something codified. That being said, I would 100% support a full RFC for adding T4, unused. Would you be willing to lead the charge on that RFC? I would certainly back you... (I went ahead and did it) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:12, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
It is also a tfd grouping problem, if it fails for 1-4 [4 opposers, each concerned with one template] it may fail for all. 89.14.255.155 (talk) 00:21, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
You know every time you talk to me, you are using a different IP. Is there a reason you won't just create an account? It makes it very difficult to have a conversation back and forth, particularly since I cannot ping you. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:23, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Will think about that. I saw one ping, but too late, disc was closed. It was the Finland municipality box. Sorry for the all caps there. My motivation for closing was, that your proposal was for turning it into a wrapper, which it was already. Anyway happy this is now in deletion. Hopefully soon all the settlement wrappers with few transclusions are deleted. 89.14.255.155 (talk) 00:35, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Non-admin closure
Yes, I also loved these slightly subversive non-admin closures on Commons (RFCs + CFDs) and Meta (RFCs), and of course they are not really subversive for folks considering "admin time" as scarce resource. But you didn't mention "should be edited wrt WP:STATS as noted below" on this closure, and I fear that nobody will do it because you didn't say so: I watched this TFD from the WP:NUMFRIENDS + WP:TEAHOUSE sideline. –84.46.53.245 (talk) 16:03, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Guillaume Morissette.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:The World Is Full of Married Men.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:The World Is Full of Married Men.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello Z. I noticed that Template:Infobox writer is in the "ready for deletion" section of the Holding Cell. However, it does not have a "speedy" or even a "being discussed" template on it. Do you know what should be done? Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk19:51, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Followup question. Since you've turned the playwright infobox into a redirect can we remove it from the holding cell? MarnetteD|Talk19:59, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
I am inclined to agree with Uanfala. It might be a bit of an ask, but if the nominations can be ground (eg 100 nominations about sport squads or train stations or draft picks) that would make it a lot easier, as I can focus on the particular set more speedily than recalibrating for all 140 different templates. That said, liking your work and trying to comment as much as possible. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:03, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
@Tom (LT): yea I'm walking a fine line between needing to keep nominations separate and trying to group them. Part of the problem is that if 1 template is objected to, the entire TFD fails. With templates that are OBVIOUSLY all related, I do try to keep them in bulk. But I appreciate the feedback and your support! :-) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:13, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm going to second this. We had an issue with another user, who is now tbanned from TFD, who was nominating dozens of templates in a day. I highly suggest, if templates cannot be grouped (e.g. "Here are six did not win the championship team navboxes") that you limit yourself to maybe 10-15 per day. Primefac (talk) 19:21, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
@Primefac: I think 10-15 is a bit too much. If this was frivolous, I.E. me just going through and willy nilly nominating things I just don't like, then I would 100% agree with you. But this isn't this is a very clear set of unused templates that is being done methodically. That being said, I think I will take a break today and am happy to cut back to a more manageable number in coming days. :-) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:24, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Oh, certainly, and I hope you didn't take my comment as a threat or anything. I guess I was just mentioning the previous case because there is a precedent for keeping the TFD pages (relatively) short-ish (in a vague hand-wavey sort of way...) since there are so few (relatively speaking) users who keep an eye on it. Primefac (talk) 19:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
@Primefac: Not at all!! I took your comment as a friendly word of caution, NOT a threat. I.E. "Other people have gotten in trouble in this area so just proceed with caution". You have always been kind to me so your feedback is greatly appreciated. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:34, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
And one more thing. With a close like this or a relisting like that, you're no doubt acting completely in good faith and in the interest of reducing the backlog, but closing (or relisting) nominations in which you've been involved is not a good idea. I'm not very well acquainted with TfD etiquette, but in the rest of wikipedia, the most you can do – and that only in exceptional circumstances – is relist a discussion in which you've commented, and only of the need for relisting is very clear. Closing a discussion in which you've opined would be a clear no-no, as would be relisting a nomination which you have started. – Uanfala (talk)00:23, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
@Uanfala: I don't see any issue with relisting a TFD that I opened as all I am doing is soliciting further discussion. As for closing, I never close a tfd that I have opened or !voted. The one that you linked to, I simply left a comment, that was not contributing to the !vote process. I appreciate the feedback. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:43, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
If you've commented in a discussion in a purely procedural way, then of course you're not involved; in the case I linked above, however, you've expressed a strong view against the one keep !vote, so you are involved (and it's irrelevant whether you've included a bold !vote in your comment or not). As for the relisting, at the point when an editor gets to relist a discussion, the relisting is usually one of two options, the other being closing as no consensus. A discussion that you decide to relist could conceivably have been closed as no consensus by somebody else: that's why people shouldn't relist their own nominations, it creates at least the appearance that they might be unconsciously trying to get more input that might sway the discussion their way. – Uanfala (talk)20:36, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
