Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2026 June 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< June 2
June 4 >

June 3

[edit source]

Template:1886 in tennis

[edit source]

Currently unused but also a navbox with a single link isn't helpful in navigating. Gonnym (talk) 07:07, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Currently unused and nearly useless, easily fits reason 3 to delete. CabinetCavers----DEPOSIT OPINION, [valued customer] 14:16, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Additional links added (and will be added in the future). Also, the yyyy in tennis templates are in the plans to be merged with {{Years in tennis}}. But that's been put on the backburner, because I'm currently in the works of a multi-page split, creating a new infobox and a calculation template for it as well as busy in everyday life and don't have the time to get around doing everything. 8rz (talk) 14:35, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: P.S. Merged both sections with identical comments into this subsection. 8rz (talk) 14:39, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 23:43, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 23:03, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cabinet of Abbas El Fassi vertical

[edit source]

Unused political cabinet table template. Gonnym (talk) 08:48, 19 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 23:41, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that I am combining multiple identical nominations because they were all a) unused at the time, b) removed due to vandalism, and c) are all only used on a single article. In other words, I see no point in debating each one separately.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 22:58, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox play

[edit source]

Propose merging Template:Infobox play, Template:Infobox opera & Template:Infobox musical to one unified Infobox.
There is significant overlap between these three infoboxes but both also contain parameters that could be of use in the other. My suggestion is to merge all three to a parent Infobox, perhaps {{Infobox stage performance}}? Obviously not all parameters apply to all 3, but those can be omitted. Also all of these would stay as redirects but I think it would benefit all to merge. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:43, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Barte (talk) 05:59, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
An infobox stage performance would be confusing and misleading, as both these infoboxes apply to works for the stage, rather than stage performances, and sounds very similiar to Template:Infobox stage production. —BrechtBro (talk) 14:34, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@BrechtBro: all for a better title here. Again, as a reminder, both {{Infobox play}} & {{Infobox musical}} would both still work... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:23, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The infobox musical template performs two automatic actions (adding a short desc to the article, and listing an article without an infobox image in a special category) that infobox play doesn't. On a less functional note, the live theater industry itself makes a particular distinction between plays and musicals, which the film industry, for example, does not. Saratoga Sam (talk) 14:23, 27 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Play (theatre), Musical theatre, and Operas (Template:Infobox opera) are all theatrical performances (see the lead sentence in each article). The 1 or 2 unique parameters that might be unique to each is not really a reason to have 3 different infoboxes. Gonnym (talk) 06:48, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: Didn't even realize there was also a {{Infobox opera}}. I have added that.
@Barte: since you had already voiced your support for the initial TFD, can you confirm if your support extends to merging {{Infobox opera}} as well? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:11, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Zackmann08: I'm out of my depth on that one. Barte (talk) 03:40, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
While opera is a type of theatrical performance, it is generally discussed as a category of music performance rather than as theater, which explains some of the differences between these infoboxes. —BrechtBro (talk) 15:41, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support/Comment. I think merging these would see an overall benefit as there are paramaters in one that would be of benefit to the other, however there would need to be an additional paramater for type of production. This could then potentially allow the functionality that Saratoga Sam mentioned to work.Blethering Scot 21:27, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment/Oppose: when infobox opera was created, it was designed intentionally with few parameters, to please members of Classical music who were used to no infobox. I see no reason to give that up. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
making that oppose to merging infobox opera with the others, neutral regarding a merge of the other two. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:04, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – {{Infobox opera}} and {{Infobox musical}} have very different sets of parameters. For opera, these were agreed on over many discussions over many years. It would be a backwards step to merge them, and will confuse editors in both fields. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 22:46, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Michael Bednarek can you say more? What parameters would constitute a backwards step or would confuse editors? By my read there is lots of overlap... What is the issue here? Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:21, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    {{Infobox opera}} has parameter |genre= which appears as a subtitle, preceding the composer; {{Infobox musical}} doesn't have |genre= and lists the composer in the box under "Music". {{Infobox musical}} has |Lyrics= and |book=; where should {{Infobox opera}}'s |librettist= appear, and under what heading? {{Infobox musical}}'s |productions= and |awards= is not applicable to operas and will confuse editors. {{Infobox opera}} has |native_name= and related parameter, which are barely relevant to musicals, whereas {{Infobox musical}} has |subtitle=. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:48, 28 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Also oppose for the same reasons. These aren't the same traditions, so they won't have the same parameters. It won't make things easier for editors to have to navigate different parameters. MONTENSEM (talk) 08:25, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose per Michael Bednarek, specifically "genre." Occasionally we find the misuse of infoboxes, inevitably someone will use "Lyrics=" rather than "librettist=" if both were options, which is unnecessarily inaccurate Drew Stanley (talk) 01:49, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, those have distinct functions. Deiadameian (talk) 09:05, 31 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 22:51, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Concurring with Michael Bednarek helpful and thorough comments, above. Tim riley talk 07:10, 6 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It appears the bulk of the opposition here is (rightly, imo) against the inclusion of {{Infobox opera}} in this proposal, while little touches on the merge of {{Infobox musical}} and {{Infobox play}}. A musical (unlike opera) is a generally considered a type of play; {{Infobox play}} even duplicates the |music= and |lyrics= fields of {{Infobox musical}}, while there's no reason the former shouldn't also have a |subtitle= field, as many plays have subtitles. It seems to be the original proposal to merge play and musical deserves further discussion. I'm out of my depth in assessing the rationale provided by Saratoga Sam regarding automatic functions.—BrechtBro (talk) 01:37, 7 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Marvel Comics universe

[edit source]

Barely used on any articles (5 transclusions at present). Doesn't serve to aide anything but cluttering the page. Also, not an Infobox by any means. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:22, 25 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, for now it's a tricky call. I did edit it early on, so may have been involved in the initial discussion but, if so, I don't recall and I'm returning to this kind fresh. My thoughts:
    • It does serve a purpose because there is potential for confusion with characters who originated outside the main universe, hence its use on the Squadron Supreme characters.
    • It only being used on 5 pages, might suggest it should be deployed more widely. However:
    • It is clunky and ugly (especially on mobile)
    • I feel there is a better solution to this - probably merging this into the existing character and/or set index infobox.
So I went "keep, for now" as it is working OK for the moment but probably should be done in an existing infobox. I'd love to consult J Greb on this one as they had the best overview on the comics infoboxes but they've been MIA for a while now. Emperor (talk) 19:51, 26 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've never seen this style of infobox, are there other examples to consider/compare? Drew Stanley (talk) 02:04, 29 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Drew Stanley: you've never seen this style because it isn't an Infobox... This is just a block of text using the Infobox code. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:53, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, was trying to understand whether other articles or topic spaces use such "blocks" Drew Stanley (talk) 00:21, 2 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete entirely. Doesn't serve a good use for the article it's on. If clarification is needed for a specific article, that should be in the article text, not shuffled into a separate (large!) sidenote. Izno (talk) 19:55, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 22:51, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Meaning of Life episode templates

[edit source]

A single use template on a single article that is only a wrapper around the Episode list template. I have replaced the Tmolep templates with the Episode list and Episode table templates, so the templates are now also redundant. Also for discussion, the template redirect at Tmolep/end X201 (talk) 08:29, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The standard templates work fine here. Gonnym (talk) 10:47, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GR road

[edit source]

Duplicates the function of {{jct}}, but does so in a less MOS-compliant manner by obscuring the links to articles behind the images instead of displaying them separately. Imzadi 1979 → 00:31, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Hello, the template was based on {{AUshield}} and {{UK road}}, as well as my experience with rapid transit icons ({{rint}} and {{ric}}). I thought that using alt text would compensate for the text duplication. Best, --Minoa (talk) 00:59, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of the road articles have been transitioned to use jct, which provides a better experience for readers of those articles. Because jct also uses some of the same backend as {{infobox road}}, it makes for a much simpler situation to support one code base now and in the future. (The remaining road marker templates that haven't been converted to wrappers for jct should either be converted or deprecated in the future.) Imzadi 1979 → 01:26, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand what you mean: I should note for the record that the inability to set a maximum icon height of 20 pixels (instead of 24, to avoid messing with the default line height) was the side reason behind creating {{GR road}}. --Minoa (talk) 03:29, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    The size in {jct} can be set as needed for a country, but 24 px was chosen as a default to balance some legibility without disturbing line height in the tables too much. There's also {{jctrdt}} for rail diagrams. Imzadi 1979 → 07:17, 3 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2026_June_3&oldid=1358172348"