Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 December 24

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< December 23 December 25 >

December 24 edit

Template:Anatomy infobox templates edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:49, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused navbox that links to Anatomy infoboxes. Don't see what benefit this is supposed to provide. It's probably just best to use the category to find anatomy infobox templates at this point. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:58, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I had a discussion about necessity of this template at Template talk:Infobox anatomy#Uses Infobox and list template. As I mentioned there are similar Infobox templates like {{Uses infobox person}}, {{Uses infobox sportsperson}}, or {{Uses Infobox settlement}}. After creating the template, Tom (LT) approved my work.

With my new edits, "Template:Anatomy infobox templates" can be seen in all sub-templates. Shkuru Afshar (talk) 13:03, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep No longer unused, don't see a problem with navboxes containing templates. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:07, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Only used in the documentation of the other templates I think, eg {{Infobox vein/doc}}. So we're using a navbox to navigate between infoboxes. "A navigation template is a grouping of links used in multiple related articles to facilitate navigation between those articles." "Between articles" not "between templates". Nigej (talk) 09:15, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:57, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Templates are used to navigate between other templates if they form a series. But it's mainly been used for navboxes from what I've seen. Maybe an exception could be made for these Infoboxes but I think there should be a greater consensus for that. Normally Infoboxes are navigated through cateogires and if this is kept, then there could be similar navboxes for infoboxes for particular topics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiCleanerMan (talk • contribs) 00:26, 25 December 2021 (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:AFL color cell edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:47, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and broken template. There is no Module:Sports color/australian rules football for this to work. Gonnym (talk) 23:29, 24 December 2021 (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:Missing param edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:44, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused metatemplate; templates can test for missing parameters fine without it. User:GKFXtalk 22:58, 24 December 2021 (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:Iffloat edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:44, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template that does something #ifexpr can do quite straightforwardly if ever required. E.g.: {{#ifexpr: floor(x) = x|...}}. User:GKFXtalk 22:52, 24 December 2021 (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:Year in country category v2 edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:44, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Test page which I presume has been finished with as it was last edited 2019. User:GKFXtalk 22:24, 24 December 2021 (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:Your user page/intro edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:44, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and not particularly clear preload template for new user pages. It is used only at User:Przykuta/Welcome, which as far as I can tell is broken. Not edited in over ten years. User:GKFXtalk 22:20, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Better alternatives are available. Nigej (talk) 11:57, 30 December 2021 (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:Puke edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:50, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused emoji template. Per WP:CIVIL, I doubt that there are many legitimate uses of this template; it's not going to contribute to a rational discussion. People can, of course, type any emojis they want without templates on most modern devices. User:GKFXtalk 22:08, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if this is part of a larger set of emoji wrapper templates, or if there was a particular reason for it in particular. The edit comment on the initial creation indicates there's a larger context here. This TfD seems to be premature without asking those basic questions. Waiting for User:SMcCandlish for some of those answers. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 23:06, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Vanisaac: The larger context, as far as I know, is User:Legoktm/Puke and Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 February 28#Template:Puke. I didn’t feel that the previous template was particularly relevant to the current template so I didn’t mention it initially. User:GKFXtalk 23:32, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
People seem to really not like puke templates. Dunno why. Legoktm (talk) 02:31, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are so many ways an editor can type a simple emoji. This is one of the things that does not need a template. Other emoji templates in the same category can also be deleted for the same reason. Gonnym (talk) 23:41, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Makes me wonder if there shouldn't just be a general emoji template that would generate a character from one of these aliases as the first parameter. I would much rather see one general use emoji template than dozens of specialized ones that beg all of these kinds of questions. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 04:54, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really see the point of that: all phones, Windows 10 (⊞ Win+.), and Mac OS all have emoji pickers built in nowadays. User:GKFXtalk 11:49, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with GKFX here. In 2022 it is very simple to find an emoji to use that templates are really not needed. Gonnym (talk) 08:52, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment is this supposed to be used on April Fool's? -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 02:56, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • If kept, rename to {{emoji-puke}} -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 02:56, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • If I'm remembering correctly, there was once a pointless {{Trout}} alternative, of someone barfing, and it was deleted but the name of it redirected to what is presently {{Puke}}, and it does seem to be part of a series of emoji wrappers. If {{emoji-puke}} would be more consistent with the names of the rest of them, then, yes, move it (if kept). I'm not seeing much of a reason to keep this, though.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  03:27, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There are no templates whose names begin "Emoji-", and there isn't, technically, a series of emoji templates (Unicode characters) that I can see. There is a series of emoticon templates (PNG/GIF images); I kind-of think they're all obsolete now to emojis but that would be a separate TfD. User:GKFXtalk 11:55, 25 December 2021 (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:Citation/book quick edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:46, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused subtemplates of Template:Citation. "book quick" is no longer necessary due to the performance enhancements from WP:Lua-based citation templates; the rest are just obsolete subtemplates. User:GKFXtalk 21:56, 24 December 2021 (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:Cite vf lineage edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 Withdrawn. Template is back in use; thanks @User:Trappist the monk. (non-admin closure) User:GKFXtalk 23:43, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused citation template for a single PDF document. User:GKFXtalk 21:48, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This template was created as a preventative against Naval History and Heritage Command changing the url of this source; see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Archive 136 § Fighter Squadron Lineage URL is toast. In that discussion you will see that another editor wrote that they would use this template to replace the (at the time) 65 instances of the dead url.
That did not happen.
So, I have updated {{cite vf lineage}} to use Module:template wrapper and replaced the 67 dead-linked templates with {{cite vf lineage}}. Having done that, I think that this tfd should be withdrawn.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:41, 24 December 2021 (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:Cite news/doc/parameterlist edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:45, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused/outdated sub-template of Template:Cite news's documentation. User:GKFXtalk 21:46, 24 December 2021 (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:Cite web/doc/parameterlist edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:47, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Long-outdated subtemplate of the documentation page of {{cite web}}. Subst and delete. User:GKFXtalk 21:44, 24 December 2021 (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:Cite journal/subst edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:49, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A template to help subst citation templates. People should not be substing citation templates because it makes the citations considerably harder to edit. My understanding is that citation templates rendered very slowly before WP:Lua so wanting to subst them is probably a relic of that era. User:GKFXtalk 21:38, 24 December 2021 (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:Cite act/core edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:44, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused subtemplates of citation templates, presumably obsoleted by the switch to Module:Citation/CS1. User:GKFXtalk 21:12, 24 December 2021 (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:SRT color edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:47, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by {{adjacent stations}} system Frietjes (talk) 20:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 00:01, 25 December 2021 (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).

Single-use weather box templates (A–C) edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:12, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

single-use weather box templates, per numerous prior discussions, these should be merged with the transcluding article and deleted. we have thousands of weatherboxes in thousands of articles, and the convention is that we put them in a separate template only when they are transcluded in more than one article. Frietjes (talk) 18:50, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Probably best to delete the Camborne one rather than putting it in Truro. Its already been copied into Camborne and including it in a different town would be confusing I think. Nigej (talk) 19:18, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Frietjes if the size of the nom is an issue, what we usually do is place them on a sub-page. So something like Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 December 24/weather boxes. Gonnym (talk) 19:58, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
sure, that's an option. I also don't want to overload people who want to check each of these, e.g. the very helpful comment above. but, if people think it would be better to push them all through at once, I can add the other 200 to the list. Frietjes (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have created the subpage linked above in order to help prevent the TFD page from exceeding the PEIS limit, which it is currently doing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:14, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete all (pending additional comments). At the time of my comment I've verified that all are single used except Template:Camborne weatherbox which is used in a user's sandbox about a different town so per the same argument Nigej gave it should just be removed from it; and Template:Columbia, South Carolina weatherbox which is used in another templates which itself isn't used. Also, please actually delete them this time and not redirect to the page, as last time another editor (User:CaradhrasAiguo) restored a lot of them. Gonnym (talk) 00:09, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and delete all per nom. Transclusions outside of articles are fine being substituted too. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:09, 28 December 2021 (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:TransMilenio route edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:11, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Gonnym (talk) 15:59, 24 December 2021 (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:Localities in Arjeplog Municipality edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 14:13, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only 1 link, superfluous: both the municipality and town refer to each other already. P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:02, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Not enough links....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:23, 24 December 2021 (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:Percentage CSS edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 12:07, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Gonnym (talk) 12:03, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete 8 years old and unused. Percentage without the "%" at the end. Somehow we've managed without it. Nigej (talk) 12:29, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete basically just a wrapper around #expr, not necessary and would be unclear if used. User:GKFXtalk 21:40, 24 December 2021 (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:NYCS const/BMT designations edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 11:09, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above are all simple single-use tables that are only used at New York City Subway nomenclature . The templates should be subst and deleted. Gonnym (talk) 10:28, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst/delete all Hidden article content. Nigej (talk) 12:25, 24 December 2021 (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:Line A (BA)/Stations edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 11:04, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused line maps sub-templates. Gonnym (talk) 10:22, 24 December 2021 (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).

Romania political party color templates edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 11:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above templates are all unused Romania political party color templates. Some of which I've replaced with Module:Political party templates. Gonnym (talk) 09:46, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:53, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I have created a subpage with the list of templates in order to help prevent the TFD page from exceeding the PEIS limit. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:16, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Added 2 more that've missed. Gonnym (talk) 07:33, 27 December 2021 (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:Party shading/Constitutional (Kenseito) edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 10:58, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Japan political party shading templates. Gonnym (talk) 09:22, 24 December 2021 (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:Canadian politics/party colours/Social Credit edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 10:58, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Canada political party color templates. Gonnym (talk) 09:18, 24 December 2021 (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:Category 5 Pacific typhoons (2001–present) edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Izno (talk) 18:54, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Category 5 typhoon" is not an entity recognized by the RSMC. 2001 is also too arbitrary of a cutoff. Jasper Deng (talk) 00:12, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as per Jasper Deng Category 5 Pacific typhoon is unofficial category uses by JTWC HurricaneEdgar 02:31, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete as Cat 1 2 3 4 5 are unofficial categories, but in JMA, the highest scale is Typhoon, which is too many. I don't discuss about the logs for deletion, but Saffir-Simpson scale is only true in hurricanes. Thingofme (talk) 02:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I agree with all you guys the Saffir-Simpson scale isn't used in the WPAC so it's meaningless to have this template. Cyclonetracker7586 (talk) 00:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rework - This is where the international tropical cyclone category system, used by the JMA on behalf of the Typhoon Committee falls down as it does not account for systems above typhoon intensity. However, it should be noted that typhoons are commonly compared to the SSHWS by reliable sources using windspeeds from the JTWC, as a result, I'm not so sure that this template shouldn't exist along with the relevant list article even if it is supposedly unofficial. As a result, I feel that some expansion, a rename to Category 5 super typhoons and a bit of TLC, this template would be worth it.Jason Rees (talk) 21:17, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I mostly agree with Jason Rees' view; however, I also understand that the SSHWS is not official in the Western Pacific basin. Furthermore, there are no templates for the other SSHWS categories in the Western Pacific. I would have suggested that this should be re-categorized to the "Very Strong Typhoon" and "Violent Typhoon" subcategories that JMA use in their tropical cyclone advisories and forecasts, but I am not sure if those subcategories appear in their archives. Vida0007 (talk) 20:51, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 08:38, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Template:Infobox tropical cyclone small has category 5, so this navbox seems a valid grouping. Gonnym (talk) 14:33, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment "2001" is not completely arbitrary, it's the first year of the 3rd millennium, 21st century, 201st decade. (no, Y2K is not the first year, it is the last year of the prior division) -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 20:41, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator. YE Pacific Hurricane 09:27, 2 January 2022 (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:Typo help edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Q28 (talk) 06:34, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This template is not used, We should delete it !! Q28 (talk) 04:28, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Based on this search, I think this might still be actively used (though not all that much), but it's substituted on every use. It's currently recommended by Wikipedia:Typo Team/moss#Instructions for editors. If I remember correctly, someone asked me to make it; I personally use {{typo help inline}} instead. -- Beland (talk) 04:36, 24 December 2021 (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:Subst:NewDYKnomination edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 04:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is no longer used, and the test is basically over. Q28 (talk) 04:25, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need it anymore. Okay to delete. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 00:08, 25 December 2021 (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:RegionsofAsia-Central.png edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 04:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The template is not in use and may be corrupted. Q28 (talk) 04:24, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Images don't belong on template space in this particular way. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:06, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment there's a bunch of commented out code in this template, and for some reason a focus on Australians. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 19:38, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Difficult to quite understand what was intended but seems to have been abandoned. Nigej (talk) 11:53, 30 December 2021 (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:Reflist/Safari testcase2 edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 2021 December 31. ✗plicit 04:25, 31 December 2021 (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:Portals1 edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 04:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this template is not used, so delete it. Q28 (talk) 04:19, 24 December 2021 (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:Party shading/ID edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 04:09, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

US [and other countries'] political party shading templates that no longer have any transclusions after migrations to {{Political party}}. No transclusions or incoming links. Q28 (talk) 04:09, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I have merged these nominations and added "[and other countries']" to the OP's nomination. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all the Spanish ones (the /letter ones) and the color/block ones. Template:Party shading/Documentation template/example should be handled with Template:Party shading/Documentation template which itself seems to be unused. Gonnym (talk) 09:01, 24 December 2021 (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:Topic status/GA edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 03:47, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This template is no longer used because … well I don't know. Q28 (talk) 03:47, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no transclusions and no usage when searching for insouce:"Topic status/GA". User:GKFXtalk 09:56, 24 December 2021 (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:Iw-matrix/easylang edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 03:47, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The template is not used, and that's what we are. Q28 (talk) 03:46, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unused. User:GKFXtalk 09:59, 24 December 2021 (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:Rus Allianz Park edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 03:43, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay, this template is not used. Q28 (talk) 03:41, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unused. Part of a Rugby Union stadium system that enables stadiums to be renamed in many articles at the same itme. Mostly used in NZ and South Africa. This is the only England one. Shouldn't stadium names be those at the time of the event? Nigej (talk) 12:46, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unused template. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:45, 24 December 2021 (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:Lyonbus edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 03:43, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The template is not used! haha! Q28 (talk) 03:39, 24 December 2021 (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:Romanian politics/party colours/PNR2012 edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 03:43, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates. Okay, so here we go. Q28 (talk) 03:38, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 09:05, 24 December 2021 (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:SSI edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 03:44, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it, because it is not used. Q28 (talk) 03:37, 24 December 2021 (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:ROOTPAGENAMEE edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Q28 (talk) 09:30, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We still don't see the use of this template, so it should be removed. Q28 (talk) 03:36, 24 December 2021 (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:HCOTM edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 03:44, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, this template is no longer in use, so it should be deleted._ Q28 (talk) 02:18, 24 December 2021 (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:HCOTM-voter edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 03:45, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, this template is no longer in use, so it should be deleted._ Q28 (talk) 02:18, 24 December 2021 (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:HCOTM candidate edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 03:45, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, this template is no longer in use, so it should be deleted._ Q28 (talk) 02:16, 24 December 2021 (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:Micronesian state elections edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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. Izno (talk) 18:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused with only two links to articles. Fails navigation. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:32, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep No longer unused. While it only has one blue link at present, it has potential to be filled out, so I think deleting it now would be pointless given that it could end up being recreated at some point. Number 57 15:01, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Number 57, it still fails NEAN. An admin such as yourself should know and while I do agree that it has potential like any other template created, the links should just be merged into Template:Micronesian elections. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:20, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    NEAN is an essay, not a policy or guideline. As I've said, this template has potential to have redlinks filled out, so deleting it would be unhelpful/pointless in my opinion. Cheers, Number 57 15:25, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's still cited as a standard when it comes to Tfd's. Navboxes that don't have five links shouldn't be kept. I agree that there is potential, but as of now it doesn't have it. It should just be merged with the Micronesian election navbox with a section of it's own. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I disagree with merging it; national election templates are for national elections, not state ones. Number 57 16:19, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:16, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Content first, then navbox if required. Not the other way round. Nigej (talk) 07:36, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now. Nicely constructed navbox with potential for use; deletion would be a waste of the time put into making it. It possibly(?) shouldn’t appear in articles until there’s more blue links, and should be deleted eventually if those articles don’t get written. User:GKFXtalk 09:10, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:HARDWORK is not a valid reason for retaining a template. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:05, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This navbox is only used on one page, and only contains two links. This does not in any way provide useful navigation; why not ditch the clutter and add a see also from 2018 Yap elections to 2022 Chuukese independence referendum if that link is deemed useful. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:05, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but allow for recreation if a couple more articles are written. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:55, 1 January 2022 (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/2021_December_24&oldid=1063570822"