Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 December 15

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< December 14 December 16 >

December 15 edit

Template:Lower Montauk Branch 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 2021 December 22. ✗plicit 23:45, 22 December 2021 (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 F3000 round 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:58, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both unused and we don't individual templates for everything. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:08, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I think that the "X-series round" [1] and "X-series round report" [2] set of templates should be merged together into "template:Motorsport series round" and "Template:Motorsport series round report" templates, so that we don't need separate templates for each motorsports series. Thus series that are missing such templates can draw from the common template for any notable races. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 23:29, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The commonly used ones should be wrapper templates that wrap about the common core for round or round report -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 23:50, 16 December 2021 (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:ThiemeBecker 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. ✗plicit 23:45, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Malformed citation template abandoned after being created in January of this year. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Needs clearing out. Nigej (talk) 19:03, 21 December 2021 (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:Ottoman military organization 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:58, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A malformed unused navbox that looks to have been abandoned after being created in January of this year. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:12, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment it was copied from the Turkish Wikipedia and neither translated nor homologated for English Wikipedia -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 00:21, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment if this is kept it should be draftified either to draft-space or to user-space -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 00:29, 20 December 2021 (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:Severomuysky Tunnel 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. ✗plicit 23:45, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused railway template written mostly in Russian. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:10, 15 December 2021 (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:WTA 500 tournaments 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 keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:57, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused navboxes containing no links and are not needed. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:07, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: links have now been added to the templates and the templates added to all linked pages, so the deletion rationale is no longer applicable. Sod25k (talk) 07:01, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sod25k, consider adding the article links to these templates if they are relevant to the navboxes. Currently, it still fails navigation because no links to tournaments are provided. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:24, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
? The first template has 12 links, the second 9. Sod25k (talk) 21:17, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sorry, I didn't see it because of the style of writing. But I see the links you've added. These can be kept as it's now used across multiple articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:54, 18 December 2021 (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:The McLellan Quaich 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 Withdrawn. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:25, 15 December 2021 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)[reply]

Unused award template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:27, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Invalid deletion reason. Template is subst only, as indicated by the documentation, which means that the nominator should have done a search to see if the template has been used. It has been used. I have marked the template as {{subst only}} to keep it off of the unused template reports. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:55, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason, it did not appear from my search results. But I'll withdraw this nomination per rationale by Jonesey. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:21, 15 December 2021 (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:WPWesterns assessment importance cat 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 2021 December 22. ✗plicit 23:44, 22 December 2021 (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:History of Burgundia 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. ✗plicit 23:44, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sidebar with very few articles specifically relating to Burgundia. Most are too broad to relate directly to the main topic for this template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:04, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unused. Creator only made 6 edits total before giving up on Wikipedia. Nigej (talk) 19:07, 21 December 2021 (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:FC Juárez 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:57, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The main team template is unused and all links within the navbox are redirects. The women's squad only has links to two articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:56, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment At worst, premature rather than wholly redundant. That someone hasn't taken the time to create articles for the red links on the FC Juárez template doesn't mean someone won't eventually. Granted, the (arguably outdated) notability criteria for female footballers will be need to be revised before the same gradualist argument can be made for the women's template, but deletion seems somewhat overzealous. --Danish Ranger (talk) 00:18, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It actually isn't. Per the standard of NEAN, the templates fail to remain as is. If you can edit the templates and provided at least five links, non-redirects and red links, then the templates can stay. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:41, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is no NEAN standard. Kindly stop invoking it like its anything more than advisory. That said, I've withdrawn my Keep vote on these as my initial argument admittedly leant a little too heavily on what-iffery. --Danish Ranger (talk) 03:00, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:50, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, not needed. No prejudice to re-creation when sufficient blue links are present. GiantSnowman 18:53, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Content first, then template if necessary. That's the system. Nigej (talk) 19:09, 21 December 2021 (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:Guardian Best Male Footballers In The World 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:55, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A navbox for a ranking from a website and not an actual award in the world of Football/Soccer. Falls under Fancruft and thus not needed. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:30, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Fancruft. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:01, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's an essay. Fancruft generally applies to pop culture; I have not seen it applied to sports, but I am open to seeing examples. The essay states: Generally speaking, the perception that an article is fancruft can be a contributing factor in its nomination and deletion, but it is not the actual reason for deletion. If you are unable to cite a TFD deletion reason, perhaps one of the guidelines at WP:TMPG might apply? – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:02, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cruft still applies here. This is a form of pop culture. It only applies to a certain group. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:22, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For one, not everything needs a navbox. Second, this is not an actual award. This is a ranking from The Guardian newspaper. Cruft applies here. I don't see on what basis the template gets to remain. Websites and publications are not award committees and their rankings are pretty minor. A navbox is not needed. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:48, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete every newspaper/website can award a footballer of the year award, winning this award isn't a defining characteristic to link all these players. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:15, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:50, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not needed, overkill. GiantSnowman 18:52, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete 'Award' has none of the stature of, say, TIME Person of the Year and probably never will. DanishRanger 23:23, 19 December 2021 (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:Miss World Continental Queen of Beauty titleholders 2019 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. ✗plicit 23:43, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused with only one link. Fails NEAN. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:06, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete One of those purely decorative templates that are actually no use for navigation. Nigej (talk) 19:11, 21 December 2021 (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:Ranks and Insignia of Non NATO Air Forces/OF/Second Spanish Republic (1931–1939) 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. ✗plicit 23:43, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates with no real place for transclusion. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:53, 15 December 2021 (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:Current time 12-hour 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 2021 December 22. ✗plicit 23:43, 22 December 2021 (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:Welcome-foreign/English 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 keep. Izno (talk) 06:37, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused format of the main template page. Not sure this will serve its purpose in the future for welcoming users in other languages, but the main template does that all by itself. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:46, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Do not delete. This template is not intended to welcome anybody; it is the text model used in creation of new Welcome-foreign/NewLanguage subtemplates, and contains the boilerplate text that is translated into the new language. It has to be stored somewhere, and this is the logical place for it. The all-caps text token LANGUAGE-NAME should be a big hint about what this page is for, and the hidden text gives instructions for creating new templates should have made its purpose clear. If this is not sufficient, a separate /doc page or Talk page could be created describing its function more explicitly. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 20:05, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Mathglot's explanation. I have marked it with {{transclusionless}} to keep it off of the unused template reports. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:51, 15 December 2021 (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:Speciesbox/old 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. ✗plicit 23:42, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not an older version of the template, but rather duplication of the main template. If older versions are to be seen there exists history revision. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:43, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: was used for regression testing, but no longer useful. — hike395 (talk) 22:45, 15 December 2021 (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:POTD/2006-02-18 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 2021 December 22. ✗plicit 23:42, 22 December 2021 (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:FULLPAGENAME decoded 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 2021 December 22. ✗plicit 23:41, 22 December 2021 (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:Kashmir topics 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. ✗plicit 23:41, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Contains way too many links for the topic. Can't be easily navigated through. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:30, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The template is unwieldy but hardly unsalvageable. Creator is now banned so chances of it being revised seem slim, however. --Danish Ranger (talk) 00:23, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unused. A wrapper template with 7 other templates embedded in it, but Kashmir doesn't use it. Nigej (talk) 18:45, 22 December 2021 (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:Black Lion squad 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. ✗plicit 03:44, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We don't tend to keep squad templates for non-notable competitions, and the Black Lion compete in a non-notable competition under WP:NRU. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:23, 15 December 2021 (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:MTGA 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. ✗plicit 23:41, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. It was used in only one article, List of Magic: The Gathering Pro Tour events, in a trivial manner, providing formatting and text for a single table legend row. It is less obscure to simply provide the formatting within the table. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:40, 15 December 2021 (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:Diving at the 2021 Junior Pan American Games 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. ✗plicit 23:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly redlinks and unused. The qualification link for the diving template is a redirect as are the three links for the latter template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:46, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete both Content first then navbox if required, not the other way round. Nigej (talk) 19:17, 21 December 2021 (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:Simon & Garfunkel albums footer 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. ✗plicit 23:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and unneeded footer template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:42, 15 December 2021 (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:Road to the Kentucky 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. ✗plicit 23:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not needed as a template for the same subject already exists and is being used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:39, 15 December 2021 (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:Thông tin sách Mathtasy 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. ✗plicit 23:39, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused malformed infobox in Vietnamese with no major edits since creation. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:29, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Creator has only made 2 edits in total and the creation of this was one of them. Nigej (talk) 14:57, 22 December 2021 (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:TransLink (BC) box 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. ✗plicit 23:39, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

no longer used after I replaced it with {{rcb}} Frietjes (talk) 17:26, 15 December 2021 (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:Audio1 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. ✗plicit 23:39, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and just contains the audio sample file. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:25, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete looks like a test. The template coding provides for replacing the indicated file. But it doesn't seem to do much of anything. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 23:34, 16 December 2021 (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:Party shading/Independent active 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. ✗plicit 14:21, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Thailand political party shading template. Gonnym (talk) 13:43, 15 December 2021 (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:Party shading/Jamaica Labour 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. ✗plicit 14:21, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused political party shading template. Gonnym (talk) 13:01, 15 December 2021 (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:Party shading/Barbados Labour Party 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. ✗plicit 14:21, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above are unused Barbados political party shading templates. Gonnym (talk) 12:33, 15 December 2021 (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:Party shading/Butler Party 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. ✗plicit 14:21, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Trinidad and Tobago political party shading template. Gonnym (talk) 12:31, 15 December 2021 (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:Party shading/Semilla 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. ✗plicit 14:20, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Guatemala political party shading template. Gonnym (talk) 12:29, 15 December 2021 (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:Party shading/Aontú 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:26, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above are all unused Irish political party shading templates. Gonnym (talk) 12:14, 15 December 2021 (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:Article wizard 2 header 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. ✗plicit 11:55, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is only linked at Wikipedia talk:Article wizard/Archive 5 as part of a redesign. Article wizard 2 does not exist as a template. There was Article wizard 2.0 per Speciallink search but they are all redirects. This could be redirected too if needed but I'm not sure since it's the template name says 2 and not 2.0. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 06:21, 15 December 2021 (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:Csimq 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. ✗plicit 01:39, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Upon inspection, the template was not actually used. Q28 (talk) 00:36, 15 December 2021 (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:Create a course page 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. ✗plicit 01:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It has not been used since 2012. Q28 (talk) 00:35, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is fine to delete as far as I can tell. It isn't actively used for education programs any more.--Sage (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:06, 15 December 2021 (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:Country showdata/mirror 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 2021 December 22. ✗plicit 03:26, 22 December 2021 (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:Commons File list (Drive)/F8 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 per G7 --. Guerillero Parlez Moi 13:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An unused experiment has not been used since it was created. Q28 (talk) 00:32, 15 December 2021 (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:Cite web/new2 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. ✗plicit 01:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It has not been used since it was created. Q28 (talk) 00:31, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 13:46, 20 December 2021 (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:Clade/styles2.css 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. ✗plicit 01:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At least in my opinion, The page is not being used. Q28 (talk) 00:30, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was used for testing in edit mode, but is no longer needed. —  Jts1882 | talk  13:41, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per creator's comment. Gonnym (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2021 (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:Clade gallery/styles-div.css 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 userfy. ✗plicit 03:19, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is unused since it was created. Q28 (talk) 00:29, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's essentially a sandbox for something I couldn't get to work for all skins. I had planned to revisit this, but if I do I'll start again. Delete or move to sandbox. —  Jts1882 | talk  13:39, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or userfy per creator's comment. Gonnym (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2021 (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:Citation/gfs 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. ✗plicit 01:41, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In summary, the page is not used. Q28 (talk) 00:28, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. No transclusions, no incoming links. Appears to be an abandoned experiment from mid-2019. The linked grant page does not appear to have any substantive changes since 2019. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:04, 15 December 2021 (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:Citation/testing 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. ✗plicit 01:42, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not used because this is a test. Q28 (talk) 00:27, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I created the page back in 2007 when I was developing the early citation macros, but there's no longer any need for it, and I have not objection to deletion. COGDEN 00:36, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per creator's comment Gonnym (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2021 (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:CSOC yearly record start/Examples 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 2021 December 22. ✗plicit 11:55, 22 December 2021 (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:CF/February 2015 peer reviews 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:25, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was not used and may have been abandoned in 2015. Q28 (talk) 00:24, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I made this template back in 2015 as we used to have to make these monthly as part of the peer review set up. Since it was never used, I am OK with deleting it. - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:34, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per creator's comment. Gonnym (talk) 17:12, 21 December 2021 (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/2021_December_15&oldid=1061683119"