Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 April 10

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< April 9 April 11 >

April 10 edit

MINSKMETRO 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All templates are now unused. Functionality is now supported via adjacent stations module: Module:Adjacent stations/Minsk Metro. BLAIXX 18:06, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 06:36, 11 April 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).

2015 Vodacom Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 19:01, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:49, 10 April 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).

2014 Vodacom Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 19:01, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:43, 10 April 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).

2013 Vodacom Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 19:00, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:38, 10 April 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).

2012 Vodacom Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 18:59, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:32, 10 April 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).

2010/2011 Vodacom Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 18:38, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:25, 10 April 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).

2015 Currie Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 18:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:21, 10 April 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).

2014 Currie Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 18:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:14, 10 April 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).

2013 Currie Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 18:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:10, 10 April 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).

2012 Currie Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 18:57, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 16:03, 10 April 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).

2004 Currie Cup squad navigation boxes 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) 18:03, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates as the competition is a yearly competition featuring the same teams and similar players each year. Not sure it offers anything to aid navigation as has been discussed here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 15:56, 10 April 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:Passeroidea Cladogram 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 12:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused species/genus template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:15, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's no longer used and very unlikely to be again. —  Jts1882 | talk  09:25, 14 April 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:Xpd5oc 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 12:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Has not been used since 2008. Q28 (talk) 04:41, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This and the other Xpd templates listed are no longer needed as the {{tld}} family of templates now have |_show_result= and |_expand= which give the option to show the result and add a link to expand the template. Gonnym (talk) 08:59, 10 April 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:Xpd5op3c 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 12:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It has not been used since 2008. Q28 (talk) 04:43, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. See response at the Xpd5oc nomination. --Gonnym (talk) 09:00, 10 April 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:Xpdop3p3c 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 12:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template has not been used in recent years. Q28 (talk) 04:46, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. See response at the Xpd5oc nomination. --Gonnym (talk) 09:00, 10 April 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:Xpd5op3p3p3c 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 12:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template has not been used in recent years. Q28 (talk) 04:47, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. See response at the Xpd5oc nomination. --Gonnym (talk) 09:00, 10 April 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:Xpdopepepec 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 12:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template has not been used in recent years. Q28 (talk) 04:47, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. See response at the Xpd5oc nomination. --Gonnym (talk) 09:00, 10 April 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:Xpdop3pec 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 12:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template has not been used in recent years. Q28 (talk) 04:48, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. See response at the Xpd5oc nomination. --Gonnym (talk) 09:00, 10 April 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:Time element 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 speedy keep. -- (non-admin closure) Q28 (talk) 02:13, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, the template has not been used since it was created. Q28 (talk) 04:58, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment how can you tell? It's a substitution template without a unique string identifier. You can tell it is a substitution template because if you don't substitute it, it results in {{Time element}} elements containing the subst string -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:53, 11 April 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:Db-notice/Test 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 12:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template, and it is going to. Q28 (talk) 05:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This was used a sandbox version and there is already a /sandbox. Gonnym (talk) 08:55, 17 April 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:Db-reason-notice/test 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 12:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to the template not being used? Q28 (talk) 05:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I'm the creator and this is an unneeded sandbox. The changes have been implemented. --Bsherr (talk) 14:31, 10 April 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:Linux layers/Test 1 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 12:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template is   Unlikely to be used. In fact, it's not on any page right now. Q28 (talk) 05:04, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This was used a sandbox version and there is already a /sandbox. Gonnym (talk) 08:54, 17 April 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:Temperature/R/int 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 12:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template is not actually used yet. Q28 (talk) 05:04, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment it's just one line of boilerplate text. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 06:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The template has no doc, its parent has no doc and the creator hasn't commented. It is currently unused and there is no indication on how this was or should be used. Gonnym (talk) 08:58, 17 April 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:RfarOpenTasks/Status/1 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 2022 April 17. ✗plicit 12:08, 17 April 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).

Mass football table templates 1 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 with no prejudice against renomination in smaller batches. Primefac (talk) 12:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of templates

No longer needed. These tables can be imported to most relevant articles and transcluded to related ones. See also Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_December_12#Template:2022_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_CAF_Second_Round_group_tables and Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022_April_2#Template:2022_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_AFC_Third_Round_group_tables Hhkohh (talk) 05:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all Firstly it is easier to watch and monitor vandalism on a template page than on a section transcluded in a main page about a tournament (I for example watchlist a few league ladders but don't watch their league pages). Also it's useful to keep the page history and important for noting editors' contributions. Also this nomination is beyond massive - are you trying to nominate all football table templates currently on Wikipedia? --SuperJew (talk) 07:25, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhkohh (talk) 08:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep/procedural close - this type of bundling of however many templates (over 100?!), all different competitions and levels, is entirely inappropriate. I'm sorry to the nominator but they have wasted their time. no prejudice to re-nominating in much smaller and organised batches over time. GiantSnowman 08:24, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@GiantSnowman: Actually 366 templates! --SuperJew (talk) 16:04, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - per above. Just too many at once. Kante4 (talk) 10:17, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Way too much to be deleting at one time, and they are all not related. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 12:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The purpose of templates like this is to keep the information in a common location to make updating easier. Now that the season or event is over, it is easier to monitor for inappropriate edits such as when a fan from team A is still angry that the official missed a call that cost the game and so changes the result of that one scoreline in their team's season article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:02, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural close for the same reasons named by GiantSnowman with no prejudice against re-nomination in smaller batches of templates related in scope, e.g. all the 2016–17 UEFA Youth League group tables in one batch and all the 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup group tables in another. This is far too many templates for a single discussion. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 15:20, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep all: there's no way to evaluate like this. Seany91 (talk) 16:13, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural close - @Hhkohh: You might want to read about WP:TRAINWRECK. Please do it step by step, nominate a few similar templates at a time so we can consider them more easily. Centaur271188 (talk) 19:07, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • withdrawn Thanks. As above, I will reopen several discussions a few days to a few months later with a few similar templates Hhkohh (talk) 01:16, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment before renominating please address the specific issues above (1) what is the purpose of the deletion; (2) who and how will the transcluded information be replaced on the thousands of articles, (3) how will vandalism be more efficiently identified and undone after the proposed deletion, (4) what benefits are there to this change; (5) how do those benefits outweigh the massive amount of changes to all these articles; (6) these templates are not breaking any processes and transclusion is not as resource intensive as it once was - so how would deleting them benefit the project, etc. --Trödel 04:39, 11 April 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:MTS style 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) 14:54, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused as the infoboxes use the style from Module:Adjacent stations/San Diego Trolley. Gonnym (talk) 13:47, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete JackPotte (talk) 13:52, 10 April 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:Badcleanup 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) 14:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warning message created in 2006, used only once. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:13, 10 April 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:Bachelors-degree-equivalent 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) 14:57, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Entire contents are two words of text used in one editor's sandbox. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:14, 10 April 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:Latest stable software release/OpenBabel 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) 14:57, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template has been replaced in the only relevant article with in-article text or a wikidata call, which are two common patterns with these single-use templates. Its only other transclusion, if any, is in a user sandbox, where it can be substed before the template is deleted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:16, 10 April 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:Chatbox 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) 15:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Test by one editor from 2020, transcluded only once at this Teahouse thread as an example. Does not appear to be usable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:48, 10 April 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:Clist relations 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) 15:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Transcluded only in one user sandbox page that has not been edited since 2009. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:53, 10 April 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:Clugston&Flemming 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) 15:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Book citation template created in 2010 but not transcluded. Citing this book is simple enough that 20 or so articles like Xenon hexafluoroplatinate just cite in in the article, which makes it easier to edit. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:57, 10 April 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:Coast Guard Canada 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) 15:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a flag image and a link. Transcluded only once, in a talk page. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:58, 10 April 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:Comic sans 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) 15:07, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Created in 2019. It is simple enough to wrap text in a span tag to style it, so this template does not appear to have been adopted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:03, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Even if this was used it should be deleted. Users should not force text styles on other users. If anyone wants to change the appearance of the text style, it should be on their css style. Gonnym (talk) 09:09, 14 April 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/2022_April_10&oldid=1141918699"