Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 September 24

< September 23	September 25 >

September 24 edit

Template:8TeamBracket-2Elim-B 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) 14:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:8TeamBracket-2Elim-B (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:8TeamBracket-2Elim-E (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:8TeamBracket-2Elim-F (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:8TeamBracket-CWS1950 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:8TeamBracket-ACC80-03 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{8TeamBracket-2Elim-A}}. –Aidan721 (talk) 23:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. – Pbrks ^(t • c) 23:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Lower round 2 operates differently between versions A and B. How can they be redundant if the brackets are structured differently, with the losers in version A playing games against different opponents than they would play in version B? Jeff in CA (talk) 06:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff in CA: See the documentation for variants. {{8TeamBracket-2Elim-B}} was replaced with {{8TeamBracket-2Elim-A}} and adds |lowerstyle=2 to switch the lower bracket. See how it's used in 1957–58 Iraq Central FA First Division Cup. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- OK. Got it. Jeff in CA (talk) 02:15, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:28, 27 September 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:Geelvincktree 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. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Geelvincktree (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:30, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subst per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:28, 27 September 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:IP V4 summary 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) 13:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IP V4 summary (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

100 transclusions versus 77,000 transclusions for {{IP summary}}. Redundant; never caught on as a valid alternative. Replace all transclusions with {{IP summary}} and then delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:24, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Jonesey95, what is the plan for the broken pages? I was about to delete this, but when making the replacements with my bot, it put a bunch of pages in Category:Pages where post-expand include size is exceeded. The documentation says that this template has a lower expansion size, which is probably why has been kept? I also see Template:User summary/light which was probably created for the same reason. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Plastikspork, how many pages are affected? I just replaced the templates at Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/tiesto.com, and it worked fine. If there are only a couple of pages affected, we can probably work around it. If 100 pages are affected, maybe we need to change {{IP summary}} to be a bit more efficient. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
delete, after replacing. we should find a solution for selectively reducing the expand size of {{IP summary}} and not worry too much about adding pages to Category:Pages where post-expand include size is exceeded in the short term. there are already so many pages in Category:Pages where post-expand include size is exceeded that adding 100 more isn't going to be a serious issue. after this is replaced, we can work on reducing the expand size of {{IP summary}} on any pages with a lot of transclusions. Frietjes (talk) 16:10, 4 October 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:Access to public information in Europe 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) 14:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Access to public information in Europe (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Replace with {{Europe topic|Access to public information in}} to link to main article automatically, ensure that all countries are included, and encourage creation of red-linked articles. See Access to public information in Serbia for example. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:28, 27 September 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:Cite Brenkwitz Advisory Opinion 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 06:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite Brenkwitz Advisory Opinion (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not an actual template. Should be fixed at Foreign Agents Registration Act and then deleted. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 05:26, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:27, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subst per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This template is by a sockpuppet and the two accounts write about all things "Brenkwitz" and his interactions with the government. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 28 September 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).