June 10
Cricket shortcuts
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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. There's a consensus to delete. Also per discussion at relevant wiki projects.
(non-admin closure)
Yashovardhan (
talk) 08:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
-
Template:Cric FC (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Cric LA (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Cric LO (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Cric ODI (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Cric T (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Cric T20I (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Cric WC (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
- Delete all. Discussed at
WT:CRIC where most of us consider them to have no useful purpose. They were obviously created to shortcut certain terms that frequently appear in cricket articles but investigation has shown that usage has been limited to a few hundred articles only and it is often clumsy, creating nonsensical grammar that has to be rectified. It is more efficient to write the terms than to use these shortcuts. One of them, {{Cric T}} replaces the word "Test" (as in
Test cricket) so it is a ten-character shortcut to a four-letter word!
Jack |
talk page 19:02, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all per nom, no reason not to just type the words. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 01:13, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom and my comments at the
discussion mentioned. I think they're confusing to the newcomer and don't serve any real purpose, as long-established editors don't tend to use them either (from what I can tell).
Lugnuts
Fire Walk with Me 07:44, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. Not needed.
Johnlp (
talk) 08:55, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all All of these abbreviations can just be easily typed rather than using this template.
Joseph
2302 (
talk) 09:25, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Keep all These are all specific shortcuts that allow the user to ensure that the agreed, correct hyphenation or capitalisation is done for the link and displayed term. As for the "ten character shortcut for a four-letter word", it's a 5 letter template shortcut for a 17 character link - [[Test cricket|Test]]. And as for the limited use (even more limited now that Jack has removed most of them from use), they could be used via the subst: function that removes any link back to the template. Similar templates exist and are widely used for Australian football teams - ie {{
AFL Ade}} and {{
WAFL SF}}.
The-Pope (
talk) 13:23, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Comment. Hello,
The-Pope. I removed them following a valid concern raised by an editor at CRIC and because investigation showed that many of them had been used negligently, creating grammatical/syntax errors such as "a ODI" or "Test cricket cricket matches". Although it is not really relevent, the templates were created and mostly used by an editor who has been blocked, which perhaps doesn't give them much credibility (though they do have much greater credibility than that stupid woman who is squatting in Downing Street); as I say, though, that isn't a reason for AfD.
Jack |
talk page 14:20, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- If you use them with subst: then nothing is obscured, and links are standardised, not a random collection of capitalisation and hyphenations via redirects. For example, 5 variations of capitalisation and hyphenations redirect to
First-class cricket. This ensures that the correct one is used. But they aren't compulsory, if you don't like them, don't use them! Easy! If the sentence is grammatically incorrect, fix it!
The-Pope (
talk) 16:44, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Keep Having been unaware of Subst: (thanks
The-Pope) I can see that they may be of use, and no way of tracking if people do actually use them in this instance. Only problem at moment is if you do put them through a subst:, you get a page filled with the deletion notice (I've done
test here)!
Spike 'em (
talk) 09:39, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all per general consensus at
WT:CRIC as encouraging non-helpful abbreviations. And, if you want add cricket abbreviations to your edit toolbox, I am certain someone could write a gadget/script for you, just ask at
WP:VPT.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 20:08, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 20:01, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
This template has content just like
Template:Villages in Manopad Mandal, which was recently listed for Deletion
IM3847 (
talk) 07:11, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 20:01, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
This template which has villages from a particular mandal may not meet Wikipedian standards
IM3847 (
talk) 07:09, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 20:01, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Template only links to two article. One on the ballpark. Other links are to a template and a category.
...William, is the complaint department really on
the roof? 13:20, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- weak keep, connects more than two articles.
Frietjes (
talk) 15:43, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Yashovardhan (
talk) 06:39, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:59, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Navbox for individual episodes of a television sitcom, of which ten have already been deleted as not having standalone notability as separate topics from the series as a whole, and five more are currently up for AFD for the same reason -- of the sixteen episodes listed here, there's just one that has actually has a credible claim to a standalone article. But a navbox isn't necessary just to link one topic to itself.
Bearcat (
talk) 14:11, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- delete, if the articles are deleted, otherwise keep as it links more than a few articles.
Frietjes (
talk) 16:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Yashovardhan (
talk) 06:14, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- comment, most of the articles were merged, so I say delete unless there so some way to repurpose it.
Frietjes (
talk) 22:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:59, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Unused, 2 of 4 links are redirects Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 04:28, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:59, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Unused, unclear inclusion Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 04:25, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:59, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Unused, there are much better block templates now. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 04:24, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:59, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Unused and incomplete Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 02:55, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:59, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Unused sidebar, project was renamed. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 02:27, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 relisted on
2017 June 17.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:57, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 relisted on
2017 June 17.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:57, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 relisted on
2017 June 17.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:57, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 relisted on
2017 June 17.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:56, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 relisted on
2017 June 17.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:56, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:56, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Unused, doesn't navigate anything Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 00:57, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 as the main rationale for deletion was "unused" and now it is used.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:55, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Unused, doesn't navigate anything. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 00:56, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
-
Solved. Now the pages covering
Ion Iliescu have incorporated this template. –
Alexandru M. (
talk ·
contribs), 10 June 2017, 16:42 (EEST)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:55, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Unused, overly loosely defined. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 00:55, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. Not a clearly defined subject, not a suitable navbox.
soetermans.
↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:41, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. Some kind of original research—these topics have no natural connection to each other.
czar 05:30, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 redirect to
Template:Shared IP.
Plastikspork
―Œ(talk) 19:54, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
Unused from 2008, doesn't seem to have a purpose Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 00:50, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).