Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 July 7

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< July 6 July 8 >

July 7 edit

Template:SRN 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. ✗plicit 23:36, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Rhine-Neckar S-Bahn Frietjes (talk) 23:40, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, unused. --Muhandes (talk) 07:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all as deprecated and unused. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:07, 11 July 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).

S-Bahn Mitteldeutschland succession 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 23:36, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/S-Bahn Mitteldeutschland Frietjes (talk) 22:49, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, unused. --Muhandes (talk) 07:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as deprecated, unused, and replaced. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:07, 11 July 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:MESB 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 23:36, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/S-Bahn Mittelelbe Frietjes (talk) 22:49, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, unused. --Muhandes (talk) 07:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all as deprecated, unused, and replaced. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:08, 11 July 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:S-Bahn-Karlsruhe 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 23:36, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by template:rail icon with Module:Adjacent stations/Karlsruhe Stadtbahn Frietjes (talk) 22:25, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 22:36, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, unused. --Muhandes (talk) 07:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as deprecated. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:06, 11 July 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:Quadruple strikethrough 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 23:38, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

useless template, simple strike through is perfectly sufficient and this is disruptive and hideous. PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:22, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep @Praxidicae: The reasoning is this: If you want strike-out part of your own comment, you use single strikethrough. If you want strike-out a spam/invalid comment you use double strikethrough. If you want to strike-out particularly bad spam/vandalism, you use quadruple strikethrough. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. Just simply no. This isn't an established process and there is absolutely no reason for it. Strikethrough is to indicate various things - if we wanted to make a comment unreadable with a template, it would just be removed. Stop creating useless templates. PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on the creator's rational for its existence. Gonnym (talk) 22:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Pointless attempt to quadruplicate bureaucracy. Johnuniq (talk) 23:55, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I can't think of any situation where crossing text out with so many lines it is unreadable is preferable to deletion. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 12:16, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as the template's only purpose is to make a WP:POINT, which is not desirable behaviour on Wikipedia. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:01, 11 July 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).

Module:Qssplit 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 23:38, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

unnecessary module, normal strikethrough is perfectly suitable PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:21, 7 July 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).

Module:RedactURL 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 12:13, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

utterly unnecessary module PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:20, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I don't think the "added functionality" in the module of redacting url's is a good idea - a double strikethrough template should just strike through the text, it shouldn't have extra functionality as it is more likely to confuse than help. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 18:01, 4 July 2022 (UTC) (source: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 July 4#Template:Double strikthrough/backend) * Pppery * it has begun... 22:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Wikipedia does not list all bad things in perpetuity. If a URL is not wanted, remove it, don't obfuscate it with a pointless template/module. Johnuniq (talk) 00:00, 8 July 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:Cheltenham Town F.C. seasons 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 12:06, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template has the same information as the Template:Cheltenham Town F.C., only this one contains more information. Because of the less related subject to this club, I think we should let the seasons stay in the Cheltenham Town F.C. template and delete the Cheltenham Town F.C. seasons template because then it becomes useless. Followertje (talk) 20:03, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same for Template:Doncaster Rovers F.C. seasons Only here the Template:Doncaster Rovers F.C. contains a little bit more related subjects. But I still think this template is to much.Followertje (talk) 20:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:49, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 21:30, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no need for separate navbox at this time, but should be restored if/when there are more season articles. GiantSnowman 21:31, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both as they are covered in the main team template. And there are not enough season articles to warrant a separate template right now, as the main team template is not too large with these season articles included there. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:54, 15 July 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:Chuan Leekpai 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 23:46, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As with the previous creations of these templates which were deleted in 2014, non of the blue links are directly related to the subjects in a way that warrants inclusion in a navbox. Paul_012 (talk) 19:55, 7 July 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:Lalit Narayan Mithila University 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, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only two working links, I deleted all the non-working ones. Muhandes (talk) 18:28, 7 July 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:Indiana's NewsCenter 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 12:08, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not an aid to navigation. The items in the second row are redirects to the items in the first row. The radio affiliates (which get or got weather from the TV station) have little to no affinity to the TV stations—WNHO is not related at all. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:05, 7 July 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:LATV 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 12:11, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only digital multicast network with a navbox of this type, and it's quite poor for navigation. Only six currently affiliated stations even use it. List of LATV affiliates and Category:LATV affiliates provide sufficient connection. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:48, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So why do we want to delete the entry/template for LATV Stations? What is the purpose of deleting useful information?? 2600:1700:1A30:9C0:115D:63A8:2C89:17C1 (talk) 00:47, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you read Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, which explains that not everything needs all three. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:30, 13 July 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:S-Bahn-Hannover 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 12:12, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

replaced by Template:rail icon with Module:Adjacent stations/Hanover S-Bahn Frietjes (talk) 17:16, 7 July 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:Infobox handball league 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 merge to Template:Infobox sports league. ✗plicit 12:16, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox handball league with Template:Infobox sports league.
Copy of {{Infobox football league}}. Contains many parameters that are not applicable to a handball league. Merge to {{Infobox sports league}}. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:25, 7 July 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).

Netball competition infoboxes 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 merge to Template:Infobox international netball competition. ✗plicit 12:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Each event does not need its own infobox. They are very similar. These infoboxes should be merged and renamed to {{Infobox international netball competition}}. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:25, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No they shouldn't, they're not harming anyone Global-Cityzen (talk) 01:35, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Should be noted this is the creator of {{Infobox Netball Quad Series}}. And to respond, they are they same template created three different times, so yes they should be merged. –Aidan721 (talk) 03:59, 8 July 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:User-talk-notice 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 13:33, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a few searches, and as far as I can tell this template has never been used anywhere. I can't think of any situations where it would be appropriate/desirable to give a formal noticeboard style warning about a discussion on someone else's talk page, it just seems rude. I also think that if this template were to be used it has the potential to be misleading, in that it could be confused with an actual noticeboard notice. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 11:47, 7 July 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:Wikidata description 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 12:13, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly used, half functional template that entirley duplicates the functionality of another template. {{Wikidata description|Q1}} and {{Wikidata|description|Q1}} do the exact same thing because this template just calls the wikidata template. Per the note on the doccumentation the language feature does not work and has been listed as "to do" for 6 years. I propose replacing the 6 or so usages with the standard wikidata template and deleting. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 11:26, 7 July 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:United States Squad 2019 FIBA World Cup 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 11:24, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No current transclusions. Per Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_December_29#Template:Slovenia_Squad_2010_FIBA_World_Championship, the general practice in basketball has been to avoid WP:TCREEP and to not create navboxes for non-medaling teams. This U.S. squad finished 7th. —Bagumba (talk) 08:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. KWiki (talk) 08:52, 7 July 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:7TeamBracket-2finals-NoSeeds 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 11:23, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused bracket template. Gonnym (talk) 06:56, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. –Aidan721 (talk) 12:58, 7 July 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:Canadian federal election, 2021 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 as single-use. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One use template. Move to the article. Yilku1 (talk) 05:37, 7 July 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:Infobox national indoor lacrosse team 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 03:42, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1 transclusion replaced by {{Infobox national lacrosse team}}. –Aidan721 (talk) 01:11, 7 July 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_July_7&oldid=1098354355"