|name=
parameter being the same as the article title) the parameter should be removed as the infobox already performs this task automaticallywhile the infobox documentation states that the parameter
Need not be usedunder these circumstances, suggesting it is optional. Discussion has indicated that while technically unneeded, the parameter has been useful to some editors. Meanwhile, the existence of the category has been taken as implied consensus for editors to perform thousands of edits. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:23, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
the parameter has been useful to some editorsis plainly false, which you would know if you even edited TV articles (It's a bit strange seeing someone who as far as I can remember has never edited in the TV project pages come about with this deletion, which while that's your right, it's also my right to point that it does not look good). Also, regardless of this category or not, removing the parameter would still be possible and allowed. Also, is there a reason you haven't followed proper procedural and actually notified the category creator (me) of this discussion? Or is this yet another thing you do out of process? Gonnym (talk) 22:30, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
you haven't followed proper [procedure]... there is no mandate for notifying a page creator when their page has been nominated for deletion. I don't know why everyone (i.e. this is not a statement that only Gonnym has made) seems to think it is required. Primefac (talk) 07:40, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Need not be used if the name is the same as the article title as the infobox handles this automatically? Gonnym (talk) 05:39, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
require discussion and a high level of consensus(WP:PROPOSAL). Template messages that the categorized pages need
"attention en masse"[or]
to be edited at someone's earliest conveniencereinforce the implication that there is broad consensus and encourages editors to quickly make edits without consideration of the merits (or drawbacks) of doing so. I'm not aware of any procedure for creating tracking categories (I failed to find such) but it seems there's been a serious misstep here. Is a category page the right place to recommend/initiate topic-wide editing practices? I haven't seen this on other tracking categories. It can link to a relevant guideline and summarize it, when such exist. In the absence of such, I feel that it should have a disclaimer like ((essay)), change "should be removed" to "it may be removed with local consensus", have the category creator's signature to indicate it is a personal recommendation, or just delete it.
|name=
parameter is redundant, and it can safely be removed as long as it does not conflict with readability or accessibility for editing the article." This would give more discrepancy to editors on when to remove the parameter, but it would not greatly limit them if they chose to remove it. — Paper Luigi T • C 22:23, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 04:53, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bibliomaniac15 04:25, 28 March 2022 (UTC)