Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 August 29: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 123: Line 123:
::::You are being ridiculous. [[User:Iterresise|Iterresise]] ([[User talk:Iterresise|talk]]) 06:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
::::You are being ridiculous. [[User:Iterresise|Iterresise]] ([[User talk:Iterresise|talk]]) 06:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per [[User:Nikkimaria]], and per the nom's statement {{tqq|The templates aren't expandable to include all the metrics that are relevant nor does it make any sense to include a large number of metrics.}} This seems to be arguing that since the templates are unable to do something they shouldn't do anyway, they're somehow problematic. The "problems" listed seem to be matters of personal preference. {{tqq|Why are we making decisions on how many cities/communities to include on the country page instead of the 'list of cities ...' articles?}} Because encyclopaedists summarise. [[User:Folly Mox|Folly Mox]] ([[User talk:Folly Mox|talk]]) 08:09, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per [[User:Nikkimaria]], and per the nom's statement {{tqq|The templates aren't expandable to include all the metrics that are relevant nor does it make any sense to include a large number of metrics.}} This seems to be arguing that since the templates are unable to do something they shouldn't do anyway, they're somehow problematic. The "problems" listed seem to be matters of personal preference. {{tqq|Why are we making decisions on how many cities/communities to include on the country page instead of the 'list of cities ...' articles?}} Because encyclopaedists summarise. [[User:Folly Mox|Folly Mox]] ([[User talk:Folly Mox|talk]]) 08:09, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
*:Another ridiculous keep vote. [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_November_28#Largest_cities_of]] is very revealing here. Some suggestions were to substitute and then delete. Deletion is preferred because substituting only takes the table out of template space and starts the cycle of a table with out a template within this series/set-of-templates. "This series of templates has slowly been created and added to various country articles as they are seen on one page and so created just so the other country page also has one" stated User:Chipmunkdavis in [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 28#Largest cities of]]. "because encyclopaedists summarise" has nothing to do with this. There isn't any guidance [policy/guideline] which forbids these tables but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be created such as [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Polities]] and within it writing "Do not add tables which show a truncated set of cities and do not create templates with these sorts of tables.". [[User:Iterresise|Iterresise]] ([[User talk:Iterresise|talk]]) 07:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)


==== [[Template:Infobox Transformers character]] ====
==== [[Template:Infobox Transformers character]] ====

Revision as of 07:27, 3 September 2023

Population of cities

problems:

  • The templates display content, which is usually best optimised to suit the article in which it is displayed, which is not usually possible with a template.
  • Whether such templates are appropriate in a GA or FA class article is irrelevant.
  • In a similar debate: templates in this series were deleted if they were only used once but those that were added to geography and demography articles were not. Could the reason they were deleted be to keep the source code of the articles reasonably clean and simple? Several tables and graphs are transcluded into COVID articles and therefore, this is a precedent which has been used in high visibility pages and some, at least, are quite complicated and used several times. Keeping such templates for this reason doesn't impact the problems with the templates though.
  • The content of the tables should be referenced in the same way as any other data set. It appears that some of the templates have references and display the reference in the destination page but others do not. The content only displays a small set of communities/cities. Why not just link to the "list of cities ..." articles instead so that all the communities/cities are displayed with the most accurate references and data? Why are we making decisions on how many cities/communities to include on the country page instead of the "list of cities ..." articles?
  • The current design only allows for the population and the subdivision in which the city is located. Depending on the laws of the country, a city can be very sparsely populated and be as large as a small country. For example, the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo is a very large area with many communities governed by one government. The other case is where a city is densely populated and subdivisions have its own government such as the Boroughs of New York City. It is very misleading to capture and compare cities across a country when definitions differ across subdivisions. Subdivisions and the United Nations have their own definitions too. It has been stated that these templates are useful but that is simply a matter of opinion.
  • The templates are very limiting in what they can display with regard to city metrics. Some example metrics are area, GDP, GNP, and Purchasing power parity. The templates aren't expandable to include all the metrics that are relevant nor does it make any sense to include a large number of metrics. Even an additional metric of area would seem pretty basic and following on that, definitely, population density. Demographics is very detailed and the templates for the cities are not suitable in those articles nor for the geography articles. Geographics and geography is about human geography. Cities include infrastructure and politics. These templates are not suitable for demography because there are too many metrics to include. Specifically: any population related data and/or information including population, sex, age, religion, race, ethnicity, etc. should be split off to demographics articles, such as demographics of Maldives, demographics of China, etc.. Any city related data and/or information should be split off to "list of cities in ..." articles such as List of cities in China and List of cities and towns in Bulgaria. If any ==Largest cities== sections should remain, they should be renamed to ==Urbanization==. A link to the "list of cities in ..." article can be left.

solutions that won't work:

  • It has also been suggested that other transclusion options such as {{Excerpt}} and {{Section}} which can take an excerpt or section from one article and display it in another be used however there needs to be consistency between the source articles for this to work since the templates are part of a set or series.
    • Reasons they won't work:
      • Only a limited set of metrics can be displayed.
      • The "list of city" articles have to be consistent in order for {{section}} and/or {{excerpt}} to make useful and consistent content. Transclusion should be used where the same content should be used in several places. An example is the lead for a group of sub-glossaries where the content is too much for a single page but the topic is identical. Transclusion is a tool and like any other tool there are times when it works well and times where it should not be used and times where it is good enough until something better comes up. Sometimes it is not obvious which applies. In the case of these templates, it isn't good enough. Something to consider is if it is WP:undue weight on population and subdivisions.

solutions:

  • Main and see also hatnote links imply a summary style section in the article from which the main and see also articles are to be linked. This is often the same sort of information that would be in the lead of the main article. When there is also a see also article it can become more complicated. However, countries that have no cities are generally island countries or microstates such as andorra, san marino, and monaco. If a country does not have a list article that discusses cities, it may be created or if it already exists, the content on that list article can be modified or expanded. That fact that this series of templates is problematic and no solution can be devised to solve the problem is a problem with the series of templates and not a problem with other articles. In the case of Bulgaria, List of cities and towns in Bulgaria is linked as "Sofia is the nation's capital and largest city; other major cities are Plovdiv, Varna and Burgas." as the last sentence in the first paragraph of the article. There isn't yet any guidance on how, which, or if city lists should be linked however main and see also are suggestions.

some points to note:

Easy, I propose that these perfectly useful templates not be deleted. Also, quit WP:BLUDGEONing the discussion participants. Satellizer el Bridget (Talk) 14:19, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are being ridiculous. Iterresise (talk) 06:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per User:Nikkimaria, and per the nom's statement The templates aren't expandable to include all the metrics that are relevant nor does it make any sense to include a large number of metrics. This seems to be arguing that since the templates are unable to do something they shouldn't do anyway, they're somehow problematic. The "problems" listed seem to be matters of personal preference. Why are we making decisions on how many cities/communities to include on the country page instead of the 'list of cities ...' articles? Because encyclopaedists summarise. Folly Mox (talk) 08:09, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Another ridiculous keep vote. Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_November_28#Largest_cities_of is very revealing here. Some suggestions were to substitute and then delete. Deletion is preferred because substituting only takes the table out of template space and starts the cycle of a table with out a template within this series/set-of-templates. "This series of templates has slowly been created and added to various country articles as they are seen on one page and so created just so the other country page also has one" stated User:Chipmunkdavis in Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 28#Largest cities of. "because encyclopaedists summarise" has nothing to do with this. There isn't any guidance [policy/guideline] which forbids these tables but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be created such as Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Polities and within it writing "Do not add tables which show a truncated set of cities and do not create templates with these sorts of tables.". Iterresise (talk) 07:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox Transformers character with Template:Infobox character.
There's nothing essential that this infobox can do that Infobox character does, all that this infobox does is enable fancruft. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 14:34, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused navbox that also duplicates Template:Orders of magnitude (time) which is used. Gonnym (talk) 10:26, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused as New Street (Manhattan) does not exist. Gonnym (talk) 06:59, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now unused. Was used on one talk page which and was subst there. Gonnym (talk) 06:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused as Railways in South East Queensland#Lines and services uses a different table. Gonnym (talk) 06:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and will be unused for 2 years. If the creator wants it then move it to their userpace, otherwise delete. Gonnym (talk) 06:38, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Part of a set of route diagram templates that have recently been deprecated. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:21, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]