Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 December 6

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< December 5 December 7 >

December 6 edit

FIFA World Cup stadium statistics templates 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) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 04:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single use template. Substitute and delete. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:53, 6 December 2022 (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).

FIFA World Cup assists templates 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) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 04:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single use template. Substitute and delete. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:50, 6 December 2022 (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:Football World Cup 2006 Qualifying tiebreakers 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 23:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article content already exists in 2006 FIFA World Cup qualification#Tiebreakers. Related group tables updated to link to that section. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:49, 6 December 2022 (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:2006 FIFA World Cup qualification - AFC 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) 14:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to {{2006 FIFA World Cup qualification}}. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:15, 6 December 2022 (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:2002 FIFA World Cup qualification - AFC goalscorers 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) 06:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single use template. Substitute and delete. –Aidan721 (talk) 20:09, 6 December 2022 (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).

FIFA World Cup knockout stage bracket templates 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) 06:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Subst to knockout stage page and transclude from there. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:01, 6 December 2022 (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).

FIFA World Cup group table templates 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) 14:10, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Subst to respective group pages and transclude from there. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:51, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Subst per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:57, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Please no. World Cup start formations are Wikipedia gold.
    Delete Champions League. Delete Olympic semi finals. The World Cup - including group matches - are life monuments. 77.241.136.85 (talk) 20:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 20:21, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and delete per nom. GiantSnowman 20:25, 7 December 2022 (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:Group 4 TTWT 2018 CG and similar 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) 04:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:39, 6 December 2022 (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:Comparison Arabic alphabet 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 delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content with no template code. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:36, 6 December 2022 (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:BISE 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) 05:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Undocumented test template created in 2010, used in one discussion page and not adopted. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:34, 6 December 2022 (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:2017 FIFA U-20 World Cup knockout stage bracket and similar 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) 05:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:25, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:46, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I created these to prevent persistent vandalism by obscurity once and for all, as it was clear that the peruvian vandals simply did not know how to access and edit templates. After the creation of these templates, the vandalism to the knockout stage brackets stopped. If these are deleted, how can it be assured that vandalism to the knockout stage brackets won't happen again? -boldblazer 19:35, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RFPP. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:41, 7 December 2022 (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:Washington gubernatorial election, 2004 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) 05:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:20, 6 December 2022 (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:Tree31 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) 05:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No documentation or categories. Used as an example in two identical discussions about potential family tree formats in 2005. Other family tree templates have subsequently been developed and adopted. Subst and delete to show the original code in those discussions without needing this template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:19, 6 December 2022 (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:Traditional fixed do 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) 05:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:17, 6 December 2022 (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:SouthVietnamWarMedals 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) 05:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:14, 6 December 2022 (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:South Devon ferries 1972-1987 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) 05:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content with no template code. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:13, 6 December 2022 (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:Six kingdom system 1998 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) 05:23, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:10, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template's author here, I agree with deletion. I believe someone else substituted it in the article where it's used, but if it hasn't been substituted yet, I will do it myself. ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 20:01, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I substituted it. ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 20:04, 6 December 2022 (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:PISAC-instructions 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) 05:23, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-page template used only at the historical page Portal:India/Selected article candidates. I have copied it into that page to ensure that it still works, so I have bypassed the TFD process. Here's the formal nomination in case someone thinks it should be kept. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No longer needed as it has been substituted for preservation. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:47, 7 December 2022 (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:Pres. Trump USA Travels (2020–21) and related 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) 05:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:04, 6 December 2022 (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:Placename argument 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) 05:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some sort of essay created by an editor ten years ago for use on talk pages. Used twice. No documentation or categories. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A fair point. The argument which provoked creation of the template looked to be spreading across Wikipedia and I thought that it would be needed in innumerable articles, but things calmed down and it was not. The text may be needed in a few more places, but I will tuck that in a personal folder. Hogweard (talk) 07:22, 7 December 2022 (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:Payload fraction table 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) 05:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:01, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Or at least merge the data into the articles that use it. Merge it into Payload fraction
Ergzay (talk) 21:03, 13 December 2022 (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:MLB team leaders 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) 05:21, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article template created in 2007. Does not appear to have been adopted for general use. No documentation or categories. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:58, 6 December 2022 (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:Montreal Catholic School Commission election, 1983 and similar 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) 05:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:36, 6 December 2022 (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:Ministers of Zimbabwe, 2017-2018 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) 05:09, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:36, 6 December 2022 (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:Macanese legislative election, 2013 comprehensive and similar 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) 05:04, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:35, 6 December 2022 (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:Cycling at the 2016 Summer Olympics – List of Qualified NOCs 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 01:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:35, 6 December 2022 (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:Commission scolaire de la Pointe-de-l'Île election, 2014 and related 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 00:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:35, 6 December 2022 (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:April 27–30, 2014 tornado outbreak map 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 23:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-page content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:34, 6 December 2022 (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:Turkish general election, June 2015 MPs by province and similar 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 23:51, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:33, 6 December 2022 (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:Nationwide opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2016 (older polls) 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) 05:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stable single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:33, 6 December 2022 (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:NCAA Division I women's soccer tournament performance by team and similar 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, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question/Comment Is a template only shown on a single article improper? I was advised to move these off their main pages into a template to be less cluttery. Jhn31 (talk) 03:01, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Subst per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:28, 7 December 2022 (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:HMM example 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) 14:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. This appears to be article content that has been orphaned, but I was unable to find where it was orphaned from. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:54, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It relates to Hidden Markov model and might perhaps be merged there. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:57, 6 December 2022 (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:Atari Lynx 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:21, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NENAN. Completely unrelated games other that having a version of some variety on the system. Unlikely to navigate between, games by platform navboxes don't exist for a reason. This is list material, not navbox, and there already exists the more-complete List of Atari Lynx games (which is linked in the navbox). oknazevad (talk) 02:49, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Navboxes are supposed to be WP:BIDIRECTIONAL meaning the navbox should be at the bottom of the article for each game mentioned in the navbox. The problem is, Lynx games are inferior, lesser known ports of otherwise popular games, so you would need to list this navbox for each game based on the obscure fact that they had a Lynx port. We don't need to navigate around that. However, do not nominate Template:Virtual Boy because they are mostly (maybe all) system exclusives. TarkusABtalk/contrib 05:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Honestly, that should go for the same reason. Games-by-platforms are list material, not navbox material, regardless of the number of games, or their exclusivity status. oknazevad (talk) 16:00, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There are not many Lynx games, this keeps them altogether, when someone gets to the bottom of each article, they can click the next one and so on. It's a perfectly valid navbox. I had it set-up different originally, this current design is someone else's. WP:NENAN really? The Navbox originally had every known Atari Lynx game on it and was complete. @TarkusAB: You can't port a game to an Atari Lynx, they had to be recoded differently due to certain limitations, no Lynx game is a true port. And what on earth has "Lynx games are inferior" got to do with deleting a template? Govvy (talk) 10:55, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm familiar with how ports work. Replace with "version" if you want. Regarding your second comment, replace "inferior" with "lesser known" if that helps. TarkusABtalk/contrib 21:35, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comment: Poor choice on my part not to link to the WP:CLNT guideline, which is the main guideline regarding whether or not to have a category, list, and/or navbox for a group of articles. This definitely is suitable for a category and for a list, but I think it doesn't meet point five of the listed criteria for considering a navbox, "If not for the navigation template, an editor would be inclined to link many of these articles in the See also sections of the articles." I don't see how one can justify including most of these articles in a see also section on any one of these articles, so wouldn't be navbox appropriate. oknazevad (talk) 17:34, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This should be, ans already is, Category:Atari Lynx games, per WP:CLNT. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 20:06, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:23, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. That these game were released for a particular platform does not mean they should be included in an all-encompassing navbox. Different intellectual property, different gameplay l, different developers. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 05:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment None of the delete arguments make any sense, how is this template doing any harm to wikipedia, if anything it easies navigation between the games. Govvy (talk) 12:52, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DOESNTHURT is not a reason to keep. Just because there are only so many Lynx games doesn't mean they need a navbox. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:33, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not a reason either for deletion, not one delete vote has given a pure reason, in fact. It's just destroying game navigation. Again, I still don't understand. And the primary concern is an argument of too many navboxes, when there is only one Lynx nav box on most Atari Lynx pages. It's not a saturation, again. The deletionists have floored arguments. Govvy (talk) 19:13, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again, please read the part at WP:CLNT where it says navboxes should only be used where it's likely that most of these links would be in the see also section of there were no navbox. It is exceedingly unlikely that most of these games, many of which only mention the Lynx version in passing, would include links to many other Lynx games. In fact, I'd say that's terrible linking and only a trivial connection.
Again, there's a reason why we don't have navboxes listing all the games on a platform – other than being on the same platform the games have nothing to do with each other.
Navboxes have a much higher threshold of connectedness than lists or categories. Games by series are natural. Games by developer and/or publisher are usually pretty connected (though not always). Games by platform are not. oknazevad (talk) 19:29, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm neutral, but I believe the argument is basically that navigation templates are meant to help aid the reader in reading about similar related topics, and that merely being released on the same platform is not really a strong enough of a tie for all these otherwise unrelated video games. Sergecross73 msg me 20:28, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These articles are barely related, they're just games released on the same platform. Imagine having navboxes for every "games on platform x". There's already a list article and a category, deleting this navbox is not "destroying navigation". soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 19:37, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"barely related"?? Really, the first five games are all Epyx, a lot of the games are related to Atari, the construct of the template is to help easy the reader when they get to the end of any Atari Lynx game article. They can then navigate per year and choose a different game. The relationship is there whether you want to deny it or not. Did you know most readers of wikipedia don't use categories. So removing this template, the reader would then have to search for List of Atari Lynx games, and use that. That is the redundancy effect. So if you remove the template, it's not helping anyone. Govvy (talk) 19:53, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also to note; of the 73 games, 63 Are Published by Atari Corp, The template I wanted to set out was Atari Lynx games published by Atari Corp. However this current template doesn't show that now or does it? Still... I have yet to see one decent valid delete reason. The first six games listed on the template are all Epyx, Atari Corp. Govvy (talk) 22:19, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And Nintendo published games for their own platform too. That would be "x publisher on x platform", also not a sensible navbox. We don't have navboxes for "games on x platform" regardless, because there's no need for it. You're just saying WP:DOESNTHURT and WP:ITSHELPFUL. The only reason why this navbox has been around so long is because of its relatively small size. We don't have {{PlayStation 2 games}} either. Listicles and categories are sufficient. And please stop saying you don't see a "valid delete reason" because you don't want to see your work be deleted or call people "deletionists" because they rather see this go. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 04:18, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can't have a navbox on the other systems because of the extensive library, Atari Lynx is one of the few viable ones. You're just being ridiculous now. Those policies you posted above mean nothing here. Govvy (talk) 12:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please, be mindful of your tone. You are an experienced editor, I shouldn't have to tell you that calling me "ridiculous" borders on a personal attack. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:55, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing wrong with my tone, I am not f'ing or blinding, hold your horses. There is nothing wrong with calling someone ridiculous. Wikipedia doesn't know what civility is anymore. Agitated tones is expressive, wikipedia has no right to destroy expressions no matter what people make of WP:CIVIL. Govvy (talk) 13:42, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I again we disagree. You are calling me ridiculous. Saying "this is ridiculous" or "this is getting ridiculous" wouldn't be directed at me. "This is stupid" or "you are stupid", "this is shit" or "you are shit" isn't the same thing either. But feel free not to listen to me and resort to personal attacks so you can express yourself. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:59, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Govvy, no, it is not okay to call a person ridiculous. We have an explicit and separate policy to WP:CIV on the point. Izno (talk) 19:57, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I agree that this makes more sense as a list or category. As a template, it doesn't really help readers to navigate between random games on the same console. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:50, 16 December 2022 (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:8TeamBracket-AFC 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 07:06, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Abandoned for modified bracket style embedded in article. –Aidan721 (talk) 02:35, 6 December 2022 (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/2022_December_6&oldid=1127940665"