Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 November 15

November 15

Template:CMG

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 12:33, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

• Template:CMG (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not every link needs a template. This template makes it unclear what it links to, the link title itself makes it unclear what it links to. I'd be very opposed to every category having a template like this. Gonnym (talk) 07:56, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:29, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Notice of Potential Renomination

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 speedy delete as G7. --Trialpears (talk) 17:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

• Template:Notice of Potential Renomination (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I cannot imagine an appropriate usage of this template. Deletion is not cleanup, and this template seems to threaten deletion in order to "force" cleanup. Further, this does not appear to be usable in a WP:TNT situation, as the placement of the template implies that the article can be worked from as a base.

Please ping me if this is kept, as if it's decided that the template's substance is OK I'd like to change the look of the template to be more consistent with other templates. — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Delete, deletion processes must be approved by community Mach61 (talk) 03:33, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

• Delete. Template is in direct opposition to our deletion policy, which states that [i]f editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page. At best, this represents a fundamental misunderstanding of our deletion policy—and it is better to delete this than to leave a misleading mainspace article banner in the template namespace. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:52, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

  Also, if this is somehow kept, I take strong objection to the use of the Wikimedia Foundation logo and the Wikimedia puzzle globe in the template design. The use in the template, as is, could be very easily read to convey a message that the WMF endorses a particular warning tag—and that message would be frankly misleading at best. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:54, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

• Delete. This would require a policy change and the design is hideous. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 06:59, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
• Delete - Red-tailed hawk already pointed this out, but the reason given in the template for deletion isn't a valid reason for deletion at AfD. The use of the Wikipedia and WMF logos, as well as the wording Notice of Potential Renomination gives the impression (intentionally or not) that it is some sort of official deadline imposed by either Wikipedia or the WMF themselves rather than an editor. It is also not a notice as such. - Aoidh (talk) 13:29, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
• Note from nominator: while this discussion was pending, PaulGamerBoy360 modified this template to remove the logos and moved it to Template:May Qualify for Deletion. I don't think this changes most of the arguments above, but pinging everyone in case their opinions changed: @Mach61, Red-tailed hawk, Daniel Quinlan, and Aoidh. — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:23, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for the heads up. While it removed the logos and notice verbiage, the wording is still an issue. It currently states This {{{1|article}}} '''may qualify for deletion because it deos not meet [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|Wikipedia's Quality Standards]].}}]]'''. but articles are not deleted for surmountable MOS concerns, so deletion of the template remains valid I think, because there is no appropriate use for the template. - Aoidh (talk) 15:43, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

  ●Delete (Creator)- I have completely changed the template to fit the style of other templates, but I as creator agree it should be deleted. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 15:56, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.