Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 February 21

February 21Edit

Template:RTL GroupEdit

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 March 4. (non-admin closure)Piranha249 (Discuss with me) 17:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

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:Oktwin TownshipEdit

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) 12:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

List of red links with no reasonable chance of ever becoming an article. Bot created. The Banner talk 10:11, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:35, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete all nominated Myanmar township templates. Most of the bluelinked "settlements" are unrelated topics with coincidentally similar names, and many more have been converted to redlinks over the years. Although created in good faith for understandable reasons, they have become a maintenance headache with little benefit to the reader. See also similar nominations on adjacent dates. Certes (talk) 11:40, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
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:Collapsible sectionEdit

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 March 6. (non-admin closure)Piranha249 (Discuss with me) 17:25, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

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:Source conflictEdit

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. Izno (talk) 03:20, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

This template (unused at the moment) confuses verifiability with the existence of different viewpoints, and asks for irrelevant actions. Verifying each source does not help editors deal with sources that disagree over something. Articles can be fully verifiable even when sources disagree. There is no *verifiability* problem if an article says that Trump claimed he won the election and all the major news sources claim that he lost, or if an article says that Country X claims this territory belongs to them and that Country Y claims the same territory belongs to Y. See also Wikipedia talk:Cleanup#Template:Source conflict. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:26, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

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).