Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 April 20

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< April 19Wi April 21 >

April 20 edit

Template:PRC Barnstar 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).

The result of the discussion was merge. Frietjes (talk) 13:58, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:PRC Barnstar with Template:People's Republic of China National Merit Medal.
Same idea, makes awarding easier Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 00:34, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support looks good; would look even better with the likeness of XJP on the emblem   -- Ohc ¡digame! 09:03, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting mostly to note that these barnstars look completely different. Which version will be the "merged" one?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:45, 20 April 2018 (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:Soviet Barnstar 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).

The result of the discussion was redirect to Template:Soviet Barnstar. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Soviet Barnstar with Template:Soviet Union Barnstar of National Merit.
Same idea, makes awarding easier. Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 00:41, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting mostly to note that these barnstars look completely different. Which version will be the "merged" one?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:51, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:45, 20 April 2018 (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:Celebrity Bainisteoir 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).

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:46, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a list of cast and crew for a TV series it fails WP:PERFNAV. --woodensuperman 13:39, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The general consensus has been not to include celebrity participants in a navbox for a reality show, only participants who became famous for their appearance on that show, or celebrity winners. This isn't the case here. And presenters, etc, will always fail WP:PERFNAV. --woodensuperman 15:43, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:50, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:45, 20 April 2018 (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:Unreferenced small 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).

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:46, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant. I believe that one user got banned in 2006 for making similar "small" versions of the "classic" message-box templates (cleanup, pov, etc.) Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 02:42, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:44, 20 April 2018 (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 references needed 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:47, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this template needed? Almost all articles use non-audiovisual sources. Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 02:37, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • This template feels fine but I would rather see the inline template used and endorsed for use, since I would agree that most pages probably don't need a full banner to request users enhance their references given that there are few-enough audio-visual references. --Izno (talk) 14:14, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:41, 20 April 2018 (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:Plot hook 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 April 28. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:51, 28 April 2018 (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:Open draft 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 April 28. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:51, 28 April 2018 (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:ODM-List-Awarding-Country 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:01, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should be unboxed then substed. Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 02:24, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Proper lead section text material. Should not be in the form of a template. Chicbyaccident (talk) 16:26, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete after unboxing and merging per nom. Frietjes (talk) 14:09, 24 April 2018 (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:Invalid references 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vague template. Lojbanist remove cattle from stage 02:17, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • What don't you understand about the wording? Should we split this into more specific templates? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:20, 10 April 2018 (UTC).[reply]
  • keep seems like a straightforward marker for requesting reference improvement to me. Gtsulab (talk) 17:15, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, replacing either with {{Primary sources}}, {{unreliable sources}}, or {{third-party}} as applicable as these are all much-wider used (though I would guess there are other templates which could be used). "Valid reference" is ambiguous to boot. --Izno (talk) 17:31, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unclear message. Probably should use Template:Unreliable sources or Template:Ref expand. Daask (talk) 22:02, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Too vague, next to useless template. Why "are not valid" is not linked in the template so as to tell us the "valid references"?. –Ammarpad (talk) 05:16, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:40, 20 April 2018 (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 Fb team templates 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. I will work on writing a bot to do the template replacement (hopefully using code provided by Frietjes :)). Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Old, outdated and deprecated template system. There is a long-standing consensus that templates are not meant to replace plain wikicode and wikilinks. There is also consensus on WT:FOOTY and past TfDs is they system should be discontinued and replaced in order to follow better practices/newer styles. (Note: This discussion is to determine a consensus to eliminate the use of the templates. The templates would first go to WP:TFD/H and later replaced before actually being deleted.) S.A. Julio (talk) 17:46, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 17:46, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all Old style, and no need. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 02:53, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - not needed. GiantSnowman 07:07, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Should have been deleted years ago. — This, that and the other (talk) 10:25, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Finally! Number 57 13:04, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Don't mind these being replaced, but what's the replacement plan? I assume they'll be replaced by Sports Table and Sports Results module, but we'd need a bot for that. Coderzombie (talk) 15:07, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Coderzombie: The first step would probably be to replace all template calls with the plain wikilink, and then later a bot hopefully could convert to the module. S.A. Julio (talk) 17:35, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@S.A. Julio: I don't think it'd be that simple, because a lot of templates are tightly coupled with table and result templates, so the replacement will have to be all or none type of bot job, can't just replace templates with wikilinks. Coderzombie (talk) 10:26, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Please list a plan for a replacement plan first and get a bot working on it, and update relevant template documentation. Only AFTER that is it okay to delete. --SuperJew (talk) 17:32, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SuperJew: Yes, once the discussion is closed, then a WP:BOTREQ can be filed. As mentioned above, the deletion would take place only after all template calls are substituted. S.A. Julio (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@S.A. Julio: Why not file the BOTREQ already? Why wait for the deletion? My concern is that deletion will be approved and they will be deleted before being dealt with properly and tables will be wrecked as has happened in the past. --SuperJew (talk) 17:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@S.A. Julio: BTW, regarding the tables, some of them list the flag if the club is not the same country as the one whose season page it is. See for example here. --SuperJew (talk) 17:46, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SuperJew: Bot requests can only be made with proof of consensus to make the edits, hence why this discussion needs to be closed first. The closing admin can take this into account and not delete immediately (TBH with this many templates, deletion will also have to be done via a bot anyway). Number 57 18:16, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the TfD administrator instructions state that templates should be deleted only after all instances are removed. In the meantime, the templates will be listed at the holding cell. And though a bit more complicated, a bot should be able to add the flagicon when necessary. S.A. Julio (talk) 18:26, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Administrative note - there are two admins with bots that are well-versed in the proper procedures of orphaning and deleting templates, as well as a large number of non-admins who do the same (most without bots). The templates will be deleted only when it is proper to do so. Primefac (talk) 01:00, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Look! Frietjes (talk · contribs) uses her script to orphan Fb teams templates Japan. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 14:47, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
only the pages using the templates listed in the holding cell. Frietjes (talk) 14:59, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete all. time to finally kill these (note that I nearly have a conversion script written). Frietjes (talk) 14:11, 24 April 2018 (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:Huggle 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:01, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, way too specific {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 17:07, 20 April 2018 (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:GetLatestWikidataAlexaUpdateDate 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 April 28. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:01, 28 April 2018 (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:GetIP 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:03, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, broken, does nothing like the title {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:52, 20 April 2018 (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:ConvertTestcase 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 April 28. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:04, 28 April 2018 (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 Upanishad 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 April 28. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:04, 28 April 2018 (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:Qhm 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:00, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No need for a separate module for this functionality; just use Module:MultiReplace (as I have done in the sandbox of the template that uses it). {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:09, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: Module:MultiReplace doesn't subst cleanly like Module:Qhm does. An attempt to insert a safesubst into {{MultiReplace}} causes it not to function correctly when substed. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:31, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You just entered the safesubst markup wrongly; it needs to be {{safesubst:<noinclude/>...}}, not {{safesubst<noinclude/>:...}}. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:36, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pppery: That doesn't make a difference, the noinclude is stripped out before the template is parsed. Feeding your template (or module) an input like {{subst:Delink question hyphen-minus/sandbox|[[?|question mark]]}} fails, where it doesn't when using {{subst:Delink question hyphen-minus|[[?|question mark]]}} --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:55, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. I used {{!}} without remembering to subst it. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 21:05, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, good catch. Since it's working, I have no objection to removing Module:Qhm. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:41, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2018 (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:StringFunc 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).

The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete it, but feel free to rename it Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:05, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The only function from this module that is used, "strip", is redundant to the "replace" function of Module:String. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 15:54, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: Incorrect,'split' is what is used in Template:Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae, 'strip' is used in Template:TC stats cyclone3 Falconjh (talk) 16:19, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(a) ping failed to work. (b) Split should probably be moved to Module:String or Module:String2; we have too many of these modules. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 00:47, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pppery: I have no problem with it getting moved. Falconjh (talk) 03:08, 21 April 2018 (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:StringReplace 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This module has three different functions:

  1. escape_pattern shouldn't be necessary at all, just pass |plain=true to whatever template you are passing the pattern.
  2. replace_all is completely redundant to the replace function in Module:String
  3. That just leaves "encode wiki page name", which has the same fault as Module:Qhm: a module that implements a hardcoded set of replacements that should use {{MultiReplace}}.

{{3x|p}}ery (talk) 15:39, 20 April 2018 (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:Fb r 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 April 28. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:59, 28 April 2018 (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 Muslim leader 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).

The result of the discussion was merge to Template:Infobox religious biography. There are the usual caveats about being technically feasible, no parameters will be lost, backwards compatibility until the merge is complete, etc. Primefac (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox Muslim leader with Template:Infobox religious biography.
Similar parameters. Capankajsmilyo (talk) 03:08, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please do keep in mind this is not JUSTAVOTE.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:50, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Capankajsmilyo, Can you put a copy of the proposed merged template in the sandbox for "Infobox religious biography"? It's hard to comment on a merge proposal without seeing the resulting merged template. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:43, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
See {{Infobox Muslim leader/testcases}} User:Capankajsmilyo(Talk | Infobox assistance) 15:45, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see {{Infobox religious biography/sandbox}} there. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:05, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
{{Infobox religious biography}} also has these params, see {{Infobox Muslim leader/testcases}}. User:Capankajsmilyo(Talk | Infobox assistance) 07:23, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see "creed" in the new format which is half the equation for Islamic leaders; nor is "sufi order" in therePatapsco913 (talk) 11:18, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 12:14, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I don't see a reason to have a template just for muslim leaders, pretty much all these items are included in the religious infobox. Wikiman5676 (talk) 03:13, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: all in favour of standardising infoboxes where possible and this is one such case. No need for what is essentially a fork. --HyperGaruda (talk) 05:25, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Muslim leaders are also religious leaders. There is no reason to have a template only for muslim leaders.--Huangdan2060 (talk) 06:14, 26 April 2018 (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:ESSR elections 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 April 28. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:10, 28 April 2018 (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:Manichitrathazhu character map 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).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2018 April 28. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:09, 28 April 2018 (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:Fb match 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Better use {{Football box collapsible}} or {{Football box}} than these templates Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 05:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 11:56, 20 April 2018 (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:Fb mls header 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).

The result of the discussion was Delete {{Fb mls header}} Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:09, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Fb mls header with Module:Sports table/WDL.
Same usage but only a bit difference in format Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 05:12, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 11:57, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@GiantSnowman: This is a merge discussion. Do you mean to delete both or only merge then delete {{Fb mls header}}? Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 07:35, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both, as I said. What purpose do these templates serve? GiantSnowman 07:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@GiantSnowman: Note: Module:Sports table/WDL is current used in 2018 FIFA World Cup, it serves 8 group stage table, but you can reconsider. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 05:40, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The WDL module is the backbone of all league tables on 1000s of articles for a variety of sports and 100% should not be deleted. Not sure why the module was mentioned, or why this was formatted as a merge discussion, "Fb mls header" itself is hardly transcluded and contains nothing which is not already present in the module. S.A. Julio (talk) 07:20, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete only Fb mls header, the template is not actually being used, and there is nothing valuable to merge into the module. However, the module should definitely not be deleted. S.A. Julio (talk) 07:20, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@S.A. Julio: Templates for discussion (TfD) not only severs deletion but also severs merge discussion. Note that this is a merge discussion in majority. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 11:06, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but there is nothing useful to merge in this case. S.A. Julio (talk) 13:53, 26 April 2018 (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:Fb MLS club footer 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:03, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Old style, no need. same usage of Module:Sports table, should be replaced, and current MLS season use that module, not sure previous is Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 05:03, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 11:58, 20 April 2018 (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:Basilisk Games 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:59, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox which only navigates 4 topics (and that series article is ripe for an AFD as well with so few games in the series). Izno (talk) 04:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • And yup, just redirected the series article. --Izno (talk) 04:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, the articles are already well-connected. Frietjes (talk) 14:12, 24 April 2018 (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/2018_April_20&oldid=1155481875"