Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 June 14

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< June 13 June 15 >

June 14 edit

Template:Ethnic groups of South Asia edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was speedied (G7).. Opabinia regalis (talk) 21:51, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ethnic groups of South Asia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Basically, WP:V. I mass-deleted some groups in this new template because I know the articles well & I know that there is often much dispute about their origins etc. That still leaves entries such as Sri Lankan Moors where, if our article is to be believed, there are also disputes relating to origin.

This thing seems to be a time-bomb, as well as a contradiction to what some articles say. I'm not convinced it has been thought through properly. Sitush (talk) 19:01, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as creator, This template did not turn out the way I indented it to, you can delete it, I didn't mean to cause any trouble. Abrahamic Faiths (talk) 19:03, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep If template has any mistakes then we can improve it. There should be a template on "ethnic groups in South Asia" or "Ethnic Groups in Indian subcontinent", its deserving topic. The said region is very diverse and should have template for ethnic groups. Though creator said to delete this template still creator don't own this template. This template now became property of Wikipedia community. And obviously this template is neither a "vandal template" or "attack template" or "nonsense template". It is template on very informative topic and highly useful for students of this field. --Human3015 Call me maybe!! • 20:25, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It is in fact a "nonsense" template, or at least a misleading one, due to WP:V and WP:NPOV as I explained above. It was a well-intentioned but flawed enterprise. As an additional point, there are over 4000 officially-recognised castes in India and even an iIndia-specific template cannot reasonably handle that volume of entries. Whether caste = ethnic group might be another debate, of course. - Sitush (talk) 20:46, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per nom and author. Frietjes (talk) 13:53, 15 June 2015 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:UEFA Youth League top scorers edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:15, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UEFA Youth League top scorers (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Youth soccer is generally non-notable as per consensus at WP:FOOTY JMHamo (talk) 16:25, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 16:31, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are templates for FIFA youth championship, like Template:FIFA U-20 World Cup awards and UEFA competitions, so i created this template. But, if its not-notable, you can delete. SPFCSeasons (talk) 01:33, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - It's not that it is an inherently non-notable thing for a navbox, more that with just two awards, it is not really a useful aid to navigation at the moment. I have no problem with this being recreated in a few years when there are more players to link to. Fenix down (talk) 09:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Youth league scoring leaders? Navbox cruft. The fact that there is no stand-alone article or list supporting this navbox per the WP:NAVBOX criteria speaks volumes. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:55, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Why is being top scorer in a youth tournament notable anyway? Joseph2302 (talk) 16:28, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - non-notable youth players don't merit a navbox. GiantSnowman 18:13, 16 June 2015 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Roads in Essex County, Ontario edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:16, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Roads in Essex County, Ontario (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Superfluous navbox, mostly duplicates the more appropriate Template:Roads in Windsor, Ontario. Floydian τ ¢ 06:22, 14 June 2015 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Railway line header2 (center) edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete after replacing. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:22, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Railway line header2 (center) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Railway line header2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Railway line header (center) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

According to WP:ROUTE, the family of these templates (also including {{Railway line header}}, {{BS-header}} and {{BS-table}}) has been deprecated in favour of {{BS-map}}. These templates only have 40, 184 and 127 transclusions respectively and can trivially be replaced with {{BS-map}}. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 05:06, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. They are in the process of (slowly) being replaced. Useddenim (talk) 16:54, 14 June 2015 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:PortugalLargestCities edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:20, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PortugalLargestCities (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Previous TfDs for this template:

A few years ago, the template was to remove but author of this template somehow defended template, author is only user who support the template. Today it is different, they changed standards. Articles of this type were removed over the past few years.

Template break the main rules of the Wikipedia: Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Fails even WP:NAVBOX. Also, no article links to this template. "30 largest cities of Portugal by population" - 30 largest cities? why not 20 or 50 - no sense. Template unnecessary, so - delete. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 04:35, 14 June 2015 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_June_14&oldid=1140526018"