Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 January 11

< January 10	January 12 >

January 11 edit

Module:Location map/data/Sri Lanka Northern Province 2 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. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:35, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Location map/data/Sri Lanka Northern Province 2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and basically redundant to the main map. if this is a better map image, we should replace the main one (although the inset in the main map is a nice feature). Frietjes (talk) 16:06, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.--Tom (LT) (talk) 01:15, 13 January 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).

Module:Location map/data/Penang (George Town - Bayan Lepas LRT) 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:32, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Location map/data/Penang (George Town - Bayan Lepas LRT) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and redundant to using the |AlternativeMap= parameter with the main map. Frietjes (talk) 16:01, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.--Tom (LT) (talk) 01:15, 13 January 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).

Template:Splitsvilla housemates 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:33, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Splitsvilla housemates (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unnecessary fork of Template:Big Brother endgame (replaced by me in Splitsvilla). if more colours are needed we can add those to Template:Big Brother endgame, but we don't need yet another big brother template. Frietjes (talk) 15:38, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replace and delete per nom.--Tom (LT) (talk) 01:15, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Actually, following from the discussions of both Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 November 13#Template:Infobox reality show candidates and Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 December 5#Big Brother season templates, that style of template is was considered redundant to the table and should be replaced (if needed) by {{Infobox reality competition season}} or by adding the day entered/exit to the table. Recreating the same template with a different name that was just deleted twice by consensus seems to be trying to find a loophole. --Gonnym (talk) 18:28, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Nigej (talk) 17:41, 16 January 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).

Template:User No Brexit 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 on author request. Seems like the template creator and principal editor endorses the deletion, so I'll short cut this per WP:CSD#G7 Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:44, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User No Brexit (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Already correctly removed from template space once, but has been recreated. The same deletion/renaming reason as last time; political userboxes should never exist in the template namespace. ‑ Iridescent 15:08, 11 January 2019 (UTC) ‑ Iridescent 15:29, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy in User:Marxistfounder's userspace, as he (re?)created it. — CoolSkittle (talk) 15:28, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I accidentally wrongly created this at MfD not TfD, CoolSkittle's above comment copied across when I moved this discussion. No content changed. ‑ Iridescent 15:31, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Iridescent, you got it correct the first time around - "Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside." Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:31, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, good grief. I've no opinion whether we leave this here, or move it back to MfD (as a recreation of something that's already been deleted by XfD, it's a straightforward procedural deletion anyway). ‑ Iridescent 15:33, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No use. Marxistfounder (talk) 15:35, 11 January 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).

Template:St 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:37, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:St (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Stw (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:St-big (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Stw-big (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

problematic name and only generates redlinks; would be better to make a generic national team flag template to avoid having one of these for every sport and every gender Frietjes (talk) 14:30, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please, Please enter the proposed abrevature name for Sepak takraw, example: Sep, Spktr, Septak, ... ? Bogic (talk) 16:23, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

please provide a link to a national Sepak takraw team page. Frietjes (talk) 17:28, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree with Frietjes. Much better to have a single template than ones for every sport. Very confusing to have so many duplicate templates. Templates also only generate redlinks. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:58, 18 January 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).

Template:KOGL-type4 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:39, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:KOGL-type4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Inappropriate license tag which appears to permit NC/ND files FASTILY 06:18, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Relates to Korea Open Government License (South Korea), itself an orphan. Unused. Template:KOGL-type1, Template:KOGL-type2 and Template:KOGL-type3 likewise (which could presumably be deleted too). The 4 only seem to differ from each other by a single character (1,2,3 or 4). Nigej (talk) 09:41, 18 January 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).