Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 November 30

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< November 29 December 1 >

November 30 edit

Template:Ray series 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 relisted on 2020 December 8. (non-admin closure) EN-Jungwon 11:17, 8 December 2020 (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:Hudson Soft 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) EN-Jungwon 11:19, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This template is redundant because there are other already-existing templates that do a better job at presenting info, which are Template:Konami franchises and Template:NEC video game consoles. Namcokid47 (Contribs) 18:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Per nom. The Konami franchises template does it better.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 11:38, 5 December 2020 (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:Ice hockey color cell 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:06, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

unused and not likely to be used per this discussion at WP Ice Hockey Frietjes (talk) 15:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete unused templates. There was never any consensus reached for the creation of these templates. In addition, they imitate the exactly same basketball templates and WP:NHL is against that. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:04, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unused and won't likely be used as consensus is to use what we have been using. -DJSasso (talk) 12:54, 1 December 2020 (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:Middle Ages wide 2 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 Redirect Template:Middle Ages wide 2 to Template:Middle Ages. (non-admin closure) EN-Jungwon 11:21, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Middle Ages wide 2 with Template:Middle Ages.
The "Middle Ages wide 2" template is inferior and repetitive to the "Middle Ages" template. The latter is more informative and complete. Aza24 (talk) 01:00, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EN-JungwonTalk 13:21, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Aza24: By merge you mean just redirecting 'Middle Ages wide 2' to 'Middle Ages' since there isn't really any content to merge? I think it's a good idea and makes sense. -- GreenC 14:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @GreenC: Yeah that's probably the best way to go about it Aza24 (talk) 01:14, 4 December 2020 (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:Eranbotproject 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:06, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unused message --TheImaCow (talk) 15:12, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EN-JungwonTalk 13:21, 30 November 2020 (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:Arena Premier League 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. Reasonable nom, no opposition. Soft delete, WP:REFUND applies. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Parent article Arena Premier League was deleted recently for lack of notability. BLAIXX 22:03, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EN-JungwonTalk 13:20, 30 November 2020 (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 Norway kommune 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 relisted on 2020 December 7. (non-admin closure) EN-Jungwon 11:41, 7 December 2020 (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:Velocio–SRAM Pro Cycling riders 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) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Team is defunct, so the template is no longer required. Craig(talk) 01:08, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - unused, no longer needed. --TheImaCow (talk) 07:21, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - it should probably be included on the riders' pages, and being defunct does not make something stop being notable. jp×g 04:16, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@JPxG: The previous consensus (and results of such here at TFD) has been to delete - four of which have been deleted in 2020 alone: January, April, May (1), May (2). Also historically in 2010, 2012, January 2014, February 2014 & March 2014. All defunct teams, all deleted as such. Velocio–SRAM disbanded at the end of the 2015 season, so while they may have been a notable team at the time, they are no longer as notable in 2020. Craig(talk) 18:29, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EN-JungwonTalk 08:44, 30 November 2020 (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:Spitting Image 2020 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) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:19, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a brand new series and while yes, these individuals are satirized in it, we can't expect to create a template for every single new show that happens to poke fun at public figures. Adding this template to each of their pages provides undue focus on this one show, compared to all the other ways these people are part of public media & life. ZimZalaBim talk 03:54, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Does not satisfy WP:NAVBOX reasons for creation – generally unrelated articles connected by something entirely trivial that does not warrant mention in the articles. If such things belong anywhere, it's in a list, certainly not a navbox. wjematherplease leave a message... 08:45, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. No added value for the reader, undue emphasis. Regards, HaeB (talk) 14:44, 30 November 2020 (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:Aespa 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) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No directly related articles for this to be a worthwhile navigational tool for the group. EN-JungwonTalk 01:27, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete in in its current state, although it is likely that, upon future releases by the group it will have relevance, similar to Template:Itzy and Template:Everglow. However, it probably makes sense to wait until they have 3-4 releases before created the template. Lukestepford (talk) 20:09, 30 November 2020 (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/2020_November_30&oldid=1138372585"