Wikipedia:WikiProject Animation/Tasks

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. Izno (talk) 23:23, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

• Template:R comics with possibilities (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) → Template:R with possibilities (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:R comics from alternative name (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) → Template:R from alternative name (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:R comics to list entry (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) → Template:R to list entry (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:R comics from merge (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) → Template:R from merge (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:R comics from related word (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) → Template:R from related word (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:R comics to section (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) → Template:R to section (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:R comics with possibilities with Template:R with possibilities; Template:R comics from alternative name with Template:R from alternative name; Template:R comics to list entry with Template:R to list entry; Template:R comics from merge with Template:R from merge; Template:R comics from related word with Template:R from related word; and Template:R comics to section with Template:R to section, respectively.
Note that this isn't a proposal to merge all these templates into one huge template, but to merge the comics redirect templates into their non-comics equivalents. I think the comics redirect templates should be merged into their respectively similary titled templates, without the word 'comics' in them, because they otherwise serve similar purposes, and I don't see the point of them being separate. I'm open to the proposals of the templates without the word 'comics' in their titles having the {{{comics}}} parameter instead if that's what Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics and its participants want. I'm surprised these proposals weren't made sooner. I've deliberately excluded 'Template:R comics naming convention' from this proposal because it serves a specific purpose and because there's no non-comics-related template similar to that one. PK2 (talk; contributions) 12:44, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: I've deliberately listed all the above templates in this one discussion because I don't see the point in having separate discussions for each of the respective comics redirect templates and their non-comics equivalents. PK2 (talk; contributions) 00:05, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: I'll wait for the rest of the discussion before formalizing my position here, but I don't find this template scheme in today's landscape the correct way. If this is a valid scheme for comics, then there is no reason why this isn't valid for films, television, horror, NZ politics, F1, etc. For the same reason I also don't think adding a parameter or having the categories (for example Category:Comics redirects from merges) are a good idea. Other media have templates such as {{R from film}}, {{R from television program}}, {{R from song}}. If comic books need a redirect template, then {{R from comics}} or {{R from comic book}} can be created (characters already have {{R from fictional character}}). If the comic book WikiProject wants to track their pages, then just add {{WikiProject Comics}} to the talk page of the redirect. Gonnym (talk) 15:59, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
• Support: I've long felt there are too many near-duplicate rcats. I see no reason to have separate versions just for comics. Alas, I don't work in comics articles so I'll leave it to others to hammer out the specifics. I see you've announced this TfD on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics, so that's good. — voidxor 19:03, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
• Comment: Not sure I completely understand the ask here. If you merge, for instance, Template:R with possibilities and Template:R to list entry, what are you wanting to merge them into? I've particularly used both of those redirect templates on numerous pages that have nothing to do with comics. Maybe instead of merging, you more correctly want to delete all of the "R comics..." type redirect templates, and simply start using the correct redirect templates? — TadgStirkland⁴⁰¹(Tadg^Talk-Email) 19:41, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

@TadgStirkland401: The nominator wants to merge all the comics into the non-comics. I.e. merge the first with the second ("R comics with possibilities" with "R with possibilities"), the third with fourth ("R comics from alternative name" with "R from alternative name") and so on. Christian75 (talk) 20:43, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

As of 2025-11-09 I feel that the proposal is clear enough (replace all the "R comics" templates with their regular counterparts), and I weak support because this also seems unnecessarily redundant to me. If anyone has a good reason for keeping them then I'd be interested to hear it! But my hunch is that it's just historical cruft. Hopefully an automated replacement can also automatedly "add {{WikiProject Comics}} to the talk page of the redirect" or whatever (if anyone actually cares about that; I don't really know) as well. Dingolover6969 (talk) 05:36, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

• Support per voidxor. Christian75 (talk) 20:43, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
• Support the actual intent here. This was mislisted as a single merge (i.e. to one template), when the intent is clearly to merge {{R comics with possibilities}} to {{R with possibilities}}, then separately merge {{R comics from alternative name}} to {{R from alternative name}}, and so on. This should be done unless there's a compelling reason we need to divide each of these "R with/from/to generic_maintenance_categorization" rcats into topical subdivisions, and that comics in particular should be one of those subdivisions. (Even if that's actually true in some case, it is not necessarily true for all of them.) We shold do all of these merges in absence of a strong showing that one or more should not be merged. This is basically useless micro-intersection, of a sort that badly mixes categorization types and purposes. The identification of something as a comics topic is already accomplished (and is a reader- as well as editor-facing matter) by comics topical categories of the usual sort. Meanwhile, "R with/from/to generic_maintenance_categorization" categories are maintenance only and just editor-facing (nor do these generally need to be topically split, since editors working on categorization of, and other maintenance pertaining to, redirects that go in such categories are doing so on a cross-topical basis. Another way of putting it is that a redir being from an alternative name (or whatever) and it also pertaining to comics is a trivial intersection and non-defining characteristic.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:01, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

  I've just clarified my proposal to request to merge the comics redirect templates into their regular non-comics equivalents. I've deliberately listed all the above templates in this one discussion because I don't see the point in having separate discussions for each of the respective comics redirect templates and their non-comics equivalents. PK2 (talk; contributions) 01:48, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

• Support what was presumably the intent here per SMcCandlish. There is no clear reason why comics, or any other topic, needs a distinct version of the general purpose RCAT templates. ~2025-31245-28 (talk) 22:30, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
• Support intent per SMcCandlish. Happy Editing -- IAmChaos 23:18, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
• Support per SMcCandlish.· · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 03:49, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

  Support the actual intent here i.e. to abandon the need for comics to have their own set of redirect templates. The generic set of templates do the job perfectly well. BobKilcoyne (talk) 06:49, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Question to supports: You are all saying you support the nomination, but three of you said per "SMcCandlish" which (if I read correctly) isn't in support of continuing with the comic-specific categorization. So it would seem the intent here is to replace (or redirect), rather than merge any functionality. Gonnym (talk) 07:14, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Support, no need to differentiate FaviFake (talk) 18:12, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

• Only Support merging the comic variants of these R-cat templates into the corresponding general templates with matching names. For the avoidance of doubt, I Oppose merging the various R-cat templates that do not include the word comics. The proposal is badly worded and confusing at first glance. It would have been clearer if a separate proposal was made for each template that it was proposed to merge with its corresponding target template; as I interpret the proposal, it is only proposed to merge Template:R comics from merge into Template:R from merge, etc. This is not actually a proposal to merge all these templates together, even though it appears to be one based on the way the templates are listed. Hence my partial opposition. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 04:21, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

  I've just clarified my proposal to request to merge the comics redirect templates into their regular non-comics equivalents. I've deliberately listed all the above templates in this one discussion because I don't see the point in having separate discussions for each of the respective comics redirect templates and their non-comics equivalents. PK2 (talk; contributions) 23:52, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

• Delete all the "redirect comics" after they have been replaces with the "normal" R-templates. My first vote was support, but it was unclear what I was supporting, but still per user:voidxor. strong oppose merging. Christian75 (talk) 08:24, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
• Support if I've understood correctly that this is fundamentally equivalent to replacing "R [media type] from [relationship between source and target article]", at least for those articles to do with comics. If we have "Redirect from alternative name", we don't need a more precise "Redirect from comic with alternative name", for example. I think I'm in agreement with BobKilcoyne. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 11:33, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
• Support per WP:NOPAGE Freddy^{[citation needed]} 18:47, 8 November 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE ~SG5536B 15:29, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
• Question - Will this have any effect on the 109,000 uses of {{R with possibilities}} other than to add that template to a few comics redirects? Robert McClenon (talk) 21:51, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • I have tried to clean up PK2's confusing nomination to make the intent clear. BD2412 T 18:05, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

    Thanks so much for doing that. PK2 (talk; contributions) 03:41, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

• Support. Daask (talk) 16:19, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
• Support mergers of 'R comics xyz' to equivalent 'R xyz' templates and categories. The duplicate 'comics' categories serve no useful purpose. There is no clear rationale for comics' special treatment and this is likely to lead to inconsistent tagging. Oppose adding 'comics' parameter as I have not seen any rationale for adding this. Overall, I support simplifying Rcats and not having a million ways to subcategorize them unless there is a meaningful benefit to maintenance or another aspect of the project. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:47, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.