Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 July 18

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< July 17 July 19 >

July 18 edit

Template:Philippines–South Korea relations 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. ✗plicit 14:29, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Contains only one article that is related to the relations between the two nations, Philippine Expeditionary Forces to Korea. Everything else is a broad general topic. Nothing directly related to the relations between The Philippines and South Korea. One relations article does it exist and that is List of ambassadors of the Philippines to South Korea. Looking from the mainspace category, you don't have much to form a navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:45, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:34, 18 July 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:York Revolution managers 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 2022 July 25. Izno (talk) 22:10, 25 July 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:Bridgeport Bluefish 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 2022 July 25. Izno (talk) 22:10, 25 July 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).

Wikipedia:CSD Quicklinks 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. Wrong venue and false nomination. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:32, 18 July 2022 (UTC) Non-admin closure[reply]

moved out of userspace without discussion Astishih (talk) 19:54, 18 July 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:Segunda División (women) Grupo 3 teamlist 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. Izno (talk) 22:11, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a list of teams in a particular grouping. 2016–17 Segunda División (women) features the teams under the article section "Group 3". WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:24, 18 July 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:ETC Shows (current and upcoming) 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 2022 July 25. Izno (talk) 22:11, 25 July 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:Mohsin kayani 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 14:27, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate of {{This is a new user}}. Unused. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. If it were in use, and there were any changes made to it, I would consider userfying – but as an exact duplicate, there's no content to save. Most likely this was created in error, but it's not quite clear-cut enough for a speedy. --ais523 18:13, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unnecessary duplicate template, likely an incorrect attempt by said user to use the original. --Kinu t/c 19:35, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, appears to have been created by mistake. 192.76.8.85 (talk) 00:59, 22 July 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:ONCE (fandom) 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 11:28, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to have been moved from the Draft namespace by its creator. I admit I'm not sure what this is supposed to be (based on its usage, perhaps an attempt at a userbox?), so bringing it for discussion. Kinu t/c 10:11, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • This appears to be some attempt at making some kind of fancy user page, but it's not really a user box. "ONCE" in all caps is the name of the fans of Korean girl group Twice. My !vote is to Substitute and Delete as a single use user space template. 192.76.8.85 (talk) 00:58, 22 July 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:If checkuser 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 for a lack of a viable use. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 07:38, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template is unused, and it seems unlikely that it could ever have a viable use. I can only think of two contexts in which someone might want to use it.

One of those potential contexts is to "hide text" that is somehow sensitive and only checkusers should know; but that would be a security problem as the content would still be visible in the page's wikitext, so such sensitive content should be shared using whatever methods checkusers normally use to privately communicate with each other.

The other situation would be when placing convenience links on a page that are only functional for checkusers (i.e. links to pages that need checkuser-level permissions to access). However, the only real context in which such links would be useful would be that of linking to a user with helper links (in the style of {{userlinks}}), but specialised for checkuser-related contexts. However, the checkuser permission only does one thing, so there's only one checkuser-related context (WP:SPI). There's already an existing template that's used there for that purpose, {{checkuser}}, and any situation which would want to generate checkuser-specific helper links should probably go via that, meaning that this template is redundant ({{checkuser}} is not written in terms of this template).

As such, deleting {{if checkuser}} is likely for the best to a) simplify the lists of namespace/user-detection templates, making it easier to find the right one, and b) discourage people from attempting to use this template inappropriately. --ais523 07:06, 18 July 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:Faderhead 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 as G7 by Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:10, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NENAN. The albums listed in the template previously had articles, but all have since been redirected to musician's page as non-notable releases. The template now has no navigational value because all links go to the same place. Also, the template now only appears at the bottom of the musician's article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 01:48, 18 July 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_July_18&oldid=1100431845"