Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 May 26#Template:Unsigned2Fix

• {{Tfd links|Uns-ip}}

I don't think we need a WHOIS search link in unsigned comments. It's only two clicks away in the normal {{tls|Unsigned}} (contributions -> WHOIS), and normally-signed comments include no such link. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22contribs%5D%5D%20%E2%80%A2%20%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Ftools.wmflabs.org%2Fwhois%2Fgateway.py%3F%22&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns2=1&ns3=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns126=1&ns127=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1&ns1728=1&ns1729=1&searchToken=bb0qlwmgv6dyfksvfr1hyuts Fewer than five uses since 2017] (when the WHOIS tool link was updated), so other editors evidently don't see the value in such a link, either. Therefore, delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:14, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Vestrian24Bio 12:16, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Unsigned2Fix|module= |type=merge}}
• {{Tfd links|UnsignedIP2Fix|type=merge}}
• {{Tfd links|Unsigned|module= |type=merge}}

Propose merging Template:Unsigned2Fix with Template:Unsigned.

{{tls|Unsigned}} can be updated to take a {{para|fix|yes}} parameter, which allows making use of the new-and-improved functionality of Module:Unsigned. Very [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns2=1&ns3=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns126=1&ns127=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1&ns1728=1&ns1729=1&search=insource%3A%22Unsigned2Fix%22 few] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=insource%3A%22UnsignedIP2Fix%22&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns2=1&ns3=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns126=1&ns127=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1&ns1728=1&ns1729=1 substitutions], so it is unlikely this will break anyone's workflow. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:04, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. Vestrian24Bio 12:15, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|InfoboxCivilWar}}

No transclusions. Redundant to other infoboxes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Vestrian24Bio 12:17, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:22, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|6 Metre World Cup medallists}}

No transclusions, documentation, incoming links, or template parameters. Appears to be article content. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:47, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Vestrian24Bio 12:17, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:22, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Promozione}}
• {{Tfd links|Prima Categoria}}

These navigational boxes do not link to anything football-related besides the heading. All the links are to the regions with nothing specific to their football teams or leagues. In contrast, see :Template:Eccellenza which does provide links to the actual regional leagues. ... discospinster _talk 16:54, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 18:32, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 02:06, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:22, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|R from non-preferred capitalisation}}

Newly created redundant template, as {{tl|R from miscapitalization}} and {{tl|R from alternative capitalization}} already exist. It's either a miscapitalization (an error in capitalization), or an alternative capitalization which may be acceptable outside of the scope of Wikipedia (as in complying with our MoS, but clearly not an error). This template seems to have been created so that one user can use it for a maintenance report and bypass redirects. What differs with this template is that the user wants to bypass piped redirects by using this template.

• {{tl|R from alternative capitalization}}: {{tq2|From other capitalisation: This is a redirect from a title with another method of capitalisation. It leads to the title in accordance with the Wikipedia naming conventions for capitalisation, or it leads to a title that is associated in some way with the conventional capitalisation of this redirect title. This may help writing, searching and international language issues.
• If this redirect is an incorrect capitalisation, then {{tl|R from miscapitalisation}} should be used instead, and pages that use this link should be updated to link directly to the target. Miscapitalisations can be tagged in any namespace.
• Use this rcat to tag only mainspace redirects; when other capitalisations are in other namespaces, use {{tl|R from modification}} instead.}}

• {{tl|R from miscapitalization}}: {{tq2|From a miscapitalisation: This is a redirect from a capitalisation error. The correct form is given by the target of the redirect.
• This redirect is made available to aid searches or to maintain links. Pages that use this link should be updated to link directly to the correct form without using a piped link hiding the correct details.
• This template tags redirects with the Redirects from miscapitalisations category, a subcategory of Redirects from incorrect names, so template {{tl|R from incorrect name}} should not be used with this template.}}

• {{tl|R from non-preferred capitalisation}}: {{tq2|This is a redirect from a capitalisation not in agreement with Wikipedia capitalization guidelines. The preferred form is given by the target of the redirect.
• This redirect is made available to aid searches or to maintain links.
• This template tags redirects with the Redirects from miscapitalisations category, a subcategory of Redirects from incorrect names, so template {{tl|R from incorrect name}} should not be used with this template.}}

What even is a "non-prefferred capitalization"? Entirely unnecessary, and adds confusion. Seems to be part of a person's personal crusade to unnnessarily tag and bypass redirects, when we have perfectly acceptable templates that already exist that tell us when we should and shouldn't do so. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:30, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:42, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep and close this discussion fork – Join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Three_categories? (a subsection of Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#On redirect from mis/other capitalization tags) to understand the context and alternatives, and to try to understand why Josh does not want certain over-capitalizations to appear in maintenance categories and reports. This template is part of good-faith effort to accommodate his concerns and those of others expressed there, and simply deleting it will put us back to square one. (Also, it's not clear what he has in mind when he says I want to "bypass piped redirects by using this template"; he seems confused about what maintenance templates are about). Dicklyon (talk) 16:00, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep There's an ongoing discussion at {{section link|Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#On_redirect_from_mis/other_capitalization_tags}}, where something like this template was suggested. With the discussion there still ongoing, this feel like WP:FORUMSHOPPING. In a nutshell:
• #Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Capitalization of NFL draft article titles determined that Wikipedia prefered lowercase "NFL draft" over "NFL Draft" per MOS:CAPS.
• #There's hundreds of redirects with "NFL Draft" in the title.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=intitle%3A%2FNFL+Draft%2F&title=Special:Search&ns0=1].
• #There's been a slow edit war at redirects like {{pagelink|2024 NFL Draft}} over placement of {{tl|R from miscapitalisation}}, with some claiming that the NFL uppercases it, so it's not a miscapitalisation.
• #Consequently, the Village Pump thread suggested calling this "non-preferred capitalisation"—not preferred by Wikipedia, even if some business trumps it as "correct".
• #The end goal is to track such non-preferred capitalisations through an existing report like Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked miscapitalizations, so that linked pages can be corrected per WP standards and consensus.
• #Note that {{tl|R from miscapitalisation}} reads {{tq2|Pages that use this link should be updated to link directly to the correct form without using a piped link hiding the correct details.}} {{tl|R from miscapitalisation}}, on the other hand, does not require the redirects to be replaced, but advises: {{tq2|If this redirect is an incorrect capitalisation, then {{tl|R from miscapitalisation}} should be used instead,}}

:—Bagumba (talk) 17:01, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

::Edit-warring over rcats. Seriously? In any event, I still think this rcat should be deleted for the reasons josh stated. This was not something that should have been boldly created before discussion was finished. voorts (talk/contributions) 18:37, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

:::"reasons josh stated"? I can't find reasons. "Entirely unnecessary, and adds confusion" is just an opinion; I don't see anyone being confused about this. It's a simple experiment in solving the problem that neither of the existing tags expresses enough for people to agree on how to use them. If we find a better way forward it's easy to back out this experiment; or we can tweak the wording, change what category it uses, etc., very easily, if we follow up in the discussion about it, rather than torpedo the effort while it's ongoing. Dicklyon (talk) 20:16, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep for now without prejudice. This should not have been created before there was consensus in the linked discussion, but now that it has been created it should not be deleted before the discussion concludes. If there is a consensus for the template or something like it can then remain, if there is a consensus against the template then it can be deleted. Thryduulf (talk) 19:01, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• Procedural close per Thryduulf, with no prejudice against the linked discussion finding consensus to delete it, although I personally disagree with the creation of the template as fait accompli. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:23, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• :Yes. @Dicklyon: While the proof of concept has been semi-boldly created, be aware of WP:FAITACCOMPLI concerns regarding transcluding it on more redirects while the VP discussion is ongoing. —Bagumba (talk) 00:30, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
• ::Yes. I placed that tag on about 20 articles where Josh had previously undone the "miscapitalization" tag. That was to help drive the discussion, before he brought this deletion request instead of reacting more sensibly. Dicklyon (talk) 05:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Wrexham A.F.C. Player of the Season|module= |type=merge}}
• {{Tfd links|Wrexham A.F.C. Player of the Year|module= |type=merge}}

Propose merging Template:Wrexham A.F.C. Player of the Season with Template:Wrexham A.F.C. Player of the Year.

They are the same with different names EchetusXe 08:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Merge this redundant "Player of the Season" template, which did not need to be created, to :Template:Wrexham A.F.C. Player of the Year, which has existed for a long time. It is unclear what the award is actually called or if there is a consistent name for it. The team's page uses both names for the award. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:47, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
• Merge per nom. GiantSnowman 18:32, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
• Merge per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:23, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Conservatism in Singapore}}

The title suggests a broad overview of conservative thought or political movements in the country, but the template exclusively covers the People's Action Party (PAP) and its politicians, even including the PAP logo as its image. This gives an inaccurate impression that conservatism in Singapore is limited to the PAP, when in fact other parties and figures, some of whom oppose the PAP, also hold conservative views on social, economic or cultural issues. As it stands, this template is misaligned, misleading and frankly unnecessary. MordukhovichAleakin (talk) 08:21, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

:Keep. That can be solved by improving the template, which is not a reason to delete the template itself. ProgramT (talk) 08:23, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Vestrian24Bio 09:34, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Don't edit this line dagger}}

Delete The template is unused. It was discussed for deletion before, but then the tools that count transclusions did not include modules, so it was not clear that it was really unused. Now it is. Peter coxhead (talk) 06:41, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Support delete The template is unused and probably hasn't been for many years.  —  Jts1882 | talk  08:21, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as unused. Vestrian24Bio 09:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per previous rationales that this template is no longer in use. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 09:36, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• {{strong|Delete}} as per nomination. —Uzume (talk) 14:27, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:23, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Aristotelianism sidebar|module= |type=merge}}
• {{Tfd links|Aristotelianism|module= |type=merge}}

Propose merging Template:Aristotelianism sidebar with Template:Aristotelianism.

No clear distinction between the scope of these two templates, we ought to merge to Template:Aristotelianism which is the older and more complete one Psychastes (talk) 04:38, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• Merge to {{t|Aristotelianism}}. Vestrian24Bio 09:32, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• Merge per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:23, 29 May 2025 (UTC)