Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 February 20

February 20

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 00:34, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One transclusion. Seems to have some sort of connection/redundancy to Template:Devonian, and there doesn't seem to be a need for both to be standalone templates. In lieu of substitute and delete, maybe merge into Template:Devonian. Steel1943 (talk) 03:54, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:03, 20 February 2019 (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).
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 2019 February 28. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 00:33, 28 February 2019 (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).
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 Module:TableTools. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 00:43, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Module:Array length with Module:TableTools.
Consolidate table-related module functions under Module:TableTools {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 17:36, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unused, and unlikely to be used: it links to the NYSE site for NASDAQ-listed stocks. Nasdaq stocks should link to the Nasdaq site, and such a template exists. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:27, 20 February 2019 (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).

Korean Broadcasting System drama 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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTTVGUIDE. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 February 12#Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation navboxes and various other similar navboxes recently deleted for the same reason. --woodensuperman 15:50, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Seven templates listing programmes only loosely connected by being shown at the same time and day on the same channel + one template linking to the other seven. Nigej (talk) 15:58, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep These are very useful templates. Deleting these templates will remove important information from tenths of articles - which drama was broadcasted before and after described drama. To keep same amount of information in articles without these templates you need to change hundreds of articles. Personally, I was using these templates very often. I can't understand why this information is considered as TVGUIDE, this is just logging of history. Are you time travelers? KarlHeintz (talk) 15:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Wikipedia is not a television guide. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:03, 27 February 2019 (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).

JTBC drama 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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTTVGUIDE. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 February 12#Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation navboxes and various other similar navboxes recently deleted for the same reason. --woodensuperman 14:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Four templates listing programmes only loosely connected by being shown at the same time and day on the same channel + one template linking to the other four. Nigej (talk) 15:50, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep These are very useful templates. Deleting these templates will remove important information from tenths of articles - which drama was broadcasted before and after described drama. To keep same amount of information in articles without these templates you need to change hundreds of articles. Personally, I was using these templates very often. I can't understand why this information is considered as TVGUIDE, this is just logging of history. Are you time travelers? KarlHeintz (talk) 15:54, 25 February 2019 (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).
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 2019 February 28. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 00:43, 28 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to warrant a navbox. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 09:21, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:54, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to warrant a navbox. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 09:16, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:54, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Editor review is defunct. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 04:51, 20 February 2019 (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).
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 2019 February 28. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 00:44, 28 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:50, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of the above district-based templates. They are now merged into the singe province-based template {{Divisional Secretariats of Sri Lanka - Western Province}}, for neatness, less clutter, and easier navigation. Usages have also been updated accordingly. Rehman 04:05, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of the above district-based templates. They are now merged into the singe province-based template {{Divisional Secretariats of Sri Lanka - Uva Province}}, for neatness, less clutter, and easier navigation. Usages have also been updated accordingly. Rehman 04:03, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of the above district-based templates. They are now merged into the singe province-based template {{Divisional Secretariats of Sri Lanka - Southern Province}}, for neatness, less clutter, and easier navigation. Usages have also been updated accordingly. Rehman 04:00, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of the above district-based templates. They are now merged into the singe province-based template {{Divisional Secretariats of Sri Lanka - Sabaragamuwa Province}}, for neatness, less clutter, and easier navigation. Usages have also been updated accordingly. Rehman 03:56, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of the above district-based templates. They are now merged into the singe province-based template {{Divisional Secretariats of Sri Lanka - North Western Province}}, for neatness, less clutter, and easier navigation. Usages have also been updated accordingly. Rehman 03:52, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of the above district-based templates. They are now merged into the singe province-based template {{Divisional Secretariats of Sri Lanka - Northern Province}}, for neatness, less clutter, and easier navigation. Usages have also been updated accordingly. Rehman 03:43, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:54, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of the above district-based templates. They are now merged into the singe province-based template {{Divisional Secretariats of Sri Lanka - North Central Province}}, for neatness, less clutter, and easier navigation. Usages have also been updated accordingly. Rehman 03:38, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:54, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of the above district-based templates. They are now merged into the singe province-based template {{Divisional Secretariats of Sri Lanka - Eastern Province}}, for neatness, less clutter, and easier navigation. Usages have also been updated accordingly. Rehman 03:30, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:54, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion of the above district-based templates. They are now merged into the singe province-based template {{Divisional Secretariats of Sri Lanka - Central Province}}, for neatness, less clutter, and easier navigation. Usages have also been updated accordingly. Rehman 03:19, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • 100 of people have 100 of opinions. If possible I'd ask to delete what I have created in en.wiki. No offence and please do not response to me. Delete them all! --AntanO 15:13, 20 February 2019 (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).

Central Railroad of New Jersey S-line 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. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 00:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecated and replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Central Railroad of New Jersey. All transclusions replaced. Mackensen (talk) 02:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this template being proposed for deletion? There is great historical significance for these component lines, the railroad had a 139 year history prior to its being absorbed by Conrail. There was no rationale given to delete the template.Dogru144 (talk) 04:30, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's just an outdated template style. Mackensen has developed Module stuff that's above my head. It's not deleting any of the information attached. Mitch32(My ambition is to hit .400 and talk 1.000.) 07:00, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: Szqecs and Jc86035 have written module stuff that is above your head. Mackensen just converted the old template style to the new module style. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 15:57, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You get what I meant. I'm trying to just help the guy relax. He alerted me to the TFD as the one who makes those. Mackensen made a different one, so I thought he did them all. Mitch32(My ambition is to hit .400 and talk 1.000.) 18:13, 20 February 2019 (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).
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; deleted as G3 by JJMC89 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 07:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Serves no purpose; the user that created this appears to be impersonating a bot. Should probably be deleted. Aspening (talk) 01:45, 20 February 2019 (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).
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. King of 05:24, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox Arrowverse crossover episode with Template:Infobox television episode.
Only 8 uses. No need for a separate template. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:33, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:02, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:15, 20 February 2019 (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).
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 2019 March 8. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 08:36, 8 March 2019 (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).
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 2019 March 3. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 03:51, 3 March 2019 (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).
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 2019 February 28. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 00:35, 28 February 2019 (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).
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 2019 March 17. (non-admin closure) CoolSkittle (talk) 22:01, 17 March 2019 (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).
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 2019 February 28. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 00:47, 28 February 2019 (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).
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 keep. Two transclusions now (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template with one transclusion using line charts pictures. Substitute and delete. Steel1943 (talk) 18:05, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Keep - Transcluded in two articles now (and possibly a third in the future). Also useful to have as a template for direct linking from outside of Wikipedia. And would be a lot of code to include in the body of the article – cleaner to have compartmentalized. Medgirl131 03:19, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:08, 20 February 2019 (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).
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 2019 March 16. — JJMC89(T·C) 21:49, 16 March 2019 (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).
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 online service. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 15:57, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox online music service with Template:Infobox online service.
Don't see any reason for separate templates. The missing params can easily be merged. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:42, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:08, 20 February 2019 (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).