Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 August 25

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< August 24 August 26 >

August 25 edit

Template:List of Sindhi people edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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. Primefac (talk) 00:38, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, and far too many Sindhi people exist for it to be a plausible navbox. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:16, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, this is why we have categories. Frietjes (talk) 17:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: per above. → Timbaaatalk 12:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral: Comment If we can populate all related articles in this template, then it can be utilized there in each article and the main article alike.JogiAsad (talk) 11:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    JogiAsad, This nav template is used as a list, nav templates are supposed to contain links to related articles; not the list of links. There is a list article doing the same. → Timbaaatalk 01:44, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Template:Culdee Fell Railway edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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. Primefac (talk) 00:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unused in the articlespace, nor is it likely to be useful now, since the one article it would be particularly useful for was redirected at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Culdee Fell Railway. Hog Farm Bacon 18:19, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Since the primary topic article is redirected and it is otherwise unused. --Bsherr (talk) 18:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Template:ISO 639 code Mohawk edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request undeletion of these templates. Primefac (talk) 00:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two unused ISO 639 name to code templates. If needed Module:ISO 639 name has a function that does exactly this. Gonnym (talk) 17:22, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Template:Infobox K-pop artist awards edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 merge to Template:Infobox awards list. Primefac (talk) 00:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox K-pop artist awards with Template:Infobox awards list.
Templates are nearly identical; named awards can easily be copied over in a merge. Template:Infobox musician awards and Template:Infobox actor awards were similarly merged into Template:Infobox awards list. Brojam (talk) 15:42, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Template:Nassau Broadcasting Partners Radio Stations edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 relisted on 2020 September 2. Primefac (talk) 00:36, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Template:Mount Ida Mustangs football coach navbox edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 no consensus. The number of links has increased since the discussion was started. Please feel free to start a new discussion if you still feel as though the template should be deleted. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:44, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Only one bluelink for this navbox, and even if the other two redlinks become articles it would still only be three bluelinks. The college closed in 2018 so this is the complete list of football coaches in school history. Eagles 24/7 (C) 05:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, little to navigate between. Geschichte (talk) 09:41, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep standard layout for college football coaches, and redlinks are an indication of articles to be created and not templates to be deleted. There is no deadline.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:04, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Paul McDonald (talk) 12:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. While there isn't a deadline for creating articles, there is also no rush for creating useless navigation templates, which navigate between 2 articles. --Gonnym (talk) 12:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - a quick review of online sources looks like there's enough material to create articles for both of the other coaches. One went through AFD previously but since seems to have gained more coverage.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheTVExpert (talk) 15:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment second head coach article has been started. While it needs work, the navigation template needs are met..--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:56, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; sufficient numbers of blue links now. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:11, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • One of the new blue links is a recreation of a deleted page via AfD and I have nominated it for speedy deletion under WP:G4. If Paulmcdonald wants to restore the article, he'll have to go through deletion review since the recreated article is nearly identical to the one that had consensus for deletion. I don't believe three links is sufficient for a navbox, especially when the subject is "Mount Ida Mustangs football coach navbox" and there is neither an article for Mount Ida Mustangs football (currently a redirect) or List of Mount Ida Mustangs head football coaches. I believe points #3 and #4 of WP:NAVBOX are not still not met here, and you could make a case for not meeting #5 either. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Template:Cat use dmy dates edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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. Primefac (talk) 00:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A completely unnecessary template. If a page needs to indicate what template is uses, it should use the relevant template on its page. Seeing as how it's almost 9 years old and has 1 usage, it is safe to say that editors didn't find it useful. Gonnym (talk) 10:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Date format is an article-by-article determination. Labeling a category like this doesn't seem likely to get attention. --Bsherr (talk) 18:55, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_August_25&oldid=976254711"