Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 18

< November 17 November 19 >

November 18

Template:High-speed rail by country

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 00:48, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:High-speed rail by country (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, out of date, and has [citation needed]s hardcoded into it Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:45, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]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:Healthcare in the United Kingdom

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 00:48, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Healthcare in the United Kingdom (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Unwieldy side bar. Somehow still has first-person commentary in it Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:44, 18 November 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:Hanyu

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 00:48, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unclear use Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:42, 18 November 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:GrandDuchyOfTransylvania,1769-73

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 00:49, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:GrandDuchyOfTransylvania,1769-73 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:41, 18 November 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:Giovanni dalle Bande Nere to Marie de' Medici

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 00:49, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Giovanni dalle Bande Nere to Marie de' Medici (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, no clear use Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:30, 18 November 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:Finance topicon

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 00:50, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Finance topicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unlikely to be used Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:26, 18 November 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:Fas

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 00:50, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unlikely to be used Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:22, 18 November 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:Expand Testlish

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 00:50, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Expand Testlish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, seems to be a test template but may be too old for a {{db-test}} Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:18, 18 November 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:Ethernet over twisted pair

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 00:50, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Ethernet over twisted pair (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused and outdated Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:17, 18 November 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:Electricity Organisations in India

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 00:50, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Electricity Organisations in India (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, seems redundant to {{Energy Ministries and Departments of India}} Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:16, 18 November 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:Eidi

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 00:51, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Eidi-cutoff (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Eidi-cutoff-years (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Eidi-cutoff-decades (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All unused. {{Eidi-century-table}} was already deleted Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:15, 18 November 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:Cursive script

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) 05:23, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Cursive script (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, use unclear Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:11, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment shouldn't this be used to point out cursive script versions of letters at the letter articles, as part of a list of all cursive letters? -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 17:07, 20 November 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:NSW Branch lines style

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 01:51, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:NSW Branch lines style (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NSW Main lines style (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NSW TrainLink 427 RDT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NSW TrainLink 428 RDT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NSW TrainLink 445 RDT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NSW TrainLink 446 RDT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused rail line templates for the New South Wales route. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:50, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They were in Special:WantedTemplates in 2014 but I don't have the tools (quick dump scan?) to know why and since when they aren't used anymore. JackPotte (talk) 13:11, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:29, 18 November 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:NWSC LegCo members

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 01:51, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:NWSC LegCo members (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused and only one article. The political party only has one article for its members. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:55, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:28, 18 November 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:NYC/E

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 01:51, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused subpages for Template:NYC (band). Has no effect on the overall template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:11, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:28, 18 November 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:NYCS 14th IRT terminal

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 November 30. Izno (talk) 21:50, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:NYCS_14th_IRT_terminal (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Complex_Layout_Fulton_Center (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Culver_IND_south_header (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Essex (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Jamaica_west_M (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Lexington_local_weekend (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Lexington_weekend (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Platform_Layout_Second_Avenue_Subway/Phase_2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Second_weekend (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Sixth_Second (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Sixth_header (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_Third-138th (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:NYCS_closed (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
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:Nagoya Municipal Subway color

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 01:52, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Nagoya Municipal Subway color (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:46, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:27, 18 November 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:Nagpur Metro lines

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 01:52, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Nagpur Metro lines (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Nagpur Metro stations (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Both unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:50, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:27, 18 November 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:National Ringette League teams (2013-14)

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 01:52, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:National Ringette League teams (2013-14) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:National Ringette League teams (2014-15) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:National Ringette League teams (2015-16) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:National Ringette League teams (2016-17) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navboxes but unnecessary as the main template for the league already has the same list of teams from each of these seasons. At least the teams that are currently active. There certainly doesn't need to be a navbox for each season. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:57, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:26, 18 November 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:Created with Adobe Illustrator

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 01:34, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Created with Adobe Illustrator (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused image warning, unlikely to have use Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:02, 18 November 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:Constituencies of Corse-du-Sud

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 November 26. Izno (talk) 05:43, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Constituencies_of_Corse-du-Sud (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
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:Cleanup list sort

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 November 29. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:49, 29 November 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:Cleanup taxobox

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 November 26. Izno (talk) 05:45, 26 November 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:2022 FIFA World Cup qualification – CAF Second Round group tables

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 November 30. Izno (talk) 21:50, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:2022_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_CAF_Second_Round_group_tables (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:2022_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_CONCACAF_first_round_group_tables (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:2022_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_CONCACAF_third_round_table (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:2022_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_UEFA_group_tables (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
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:TAFI Main page queue/1 and /2

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) 19:29, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:TAFI Main page queue/1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:TAFI Main page queue/2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused set of TAFI template subpages. Appear to be part of an abandoned experiment to set up Wikipedia:TAFI random generation. I have corresponded with the creator of these templates in advance of this nomination. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:33, 18 November 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:Shiromani Akali Dal (Sanyukt)

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 12:35, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Shiromani Akali Dal (Sanyukt) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template containing no content -- Asartea Talk | Contribs 10:14, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No article exist for the party outside the mainspace for there to be a template for it. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:48, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 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:Year in various calendars/Chinese

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) 14:42, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Year in various calendars/Chinese (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

We don't need to change the template, because we don't learn Chinese characters. Did Q28 make a mess today? 05:20, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:49, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no longer used after Special:Diff/570405583. The nomination statement makes no sense, as this template has nothing to do with learn[ing] Chinese characters * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Transwiki to Templates.wikia and if Wikiversity or Wikisource accepts this form of material. Wikimedia should have a GPL/GFDL archive of MediaWiki-coding coded material for the wider wiki world community to enrich the web properly, and have a proper non-WMF-only wiki-coding world community. -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 01:20, 20 November 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:Wikibreak Thanksgiving

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 November 25. ✗plicit 12:37, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Wikibreak_Thanksgiving (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
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:Wikibreak break

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 November 25. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:42, 25 November 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:Whybots

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 12:35, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

It has no use and should not be used. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:54, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This is a subst only template, so it's lack of use is ireelevant, but it only seems to have ever been substituted twice. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 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:Uw-t1-h

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 November 25. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:41, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Uw-t1-h (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
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:Main Page responsive.css

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 12:36, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Main Page responsive.css (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Looks like a test that was never used. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:49, 18 November 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:Random-subst

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 12:36, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Random-subst (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

There's no use. It looks like a test. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:47, 18 November 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:R to disambiguation page/preload

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) 14:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that this template will be used. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:46, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep – I suspect that this may be This is subst'd by some of Dispenser's very helpful tools, which are still in frequent use. I can't work out which without analysing a lot of source code. Certes (talk) 14:31, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Yep, it's substed by dabfix, see like 1321 of http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/sources/dabfix.py. I couldn't get the tool to work properly, but that's probably due to my own inexperience and doesn't indicate lack of use. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 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:Pre not pre

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) 14:41, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Pre not pre (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The purpose is not clear and there is no example of the used. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:44, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, though I think the purpose is mostly clear as a template for demonstration of code in some form. It's disuse however indicates either there are other templates out and about, or no one cares to give both in a single template. --Izno (talk) 06:05, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Izno. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Transwiki to Templates.Wikia and if Wikiversity or Wikisource accepts this material. Such should form a basis of a MediaWiki template coding codebase repository. WMF should have something like that created for GPl/GFDL/CC content. -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 01:24, 20 November 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:Pre/styles.css

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) 14:39, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The CSS is no longer used by the template. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:43, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Agree --Great Brightstar (talk) 05:48, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert to use instead. I'm not advocating for the current content of the templatestyles page, but there are valid, in-use styles that should be moved out of the template and into the templatestyles page. --Izno (talk) 06:04, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Deleting templates as unused does not prohibit them from being recreated if the recreation is actually used. A future plan to move {{pre}} to templatestyles is not meaningfully impeded by deleting the failed experiment currently at this title. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed. --Izno (talk) 06:14, 19 November 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 row/styles.css

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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:38, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since we no longer use this CSS, it should be removed. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:41, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Not "no longer", "not yet". It was a project I started to move the POTD mess of templates at least for the main page over to flex styles that I haven't come back to but is near the front of my mind recently. Izno (talk) 05:57, 18 November 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 picture

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 12:36, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:POTD picture (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A failed attempt resulted in the template no longer being used. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:40, 18 November 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 mini

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 12:36, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:POTD mini (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

An obsolete template. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:40, 18 November 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/2024-03-29

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) 14:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not necessary. He created it too early. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:39, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Izno (talk) 06:03, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Is there some reason we shouldn't be scheduling POTDs years in advance? I'm not seeing one, and the nominator provides no argument other than a bare assertion. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Too early for such a nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:44, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Scheduled for the next available Good Friday, which is appropriate for the subject. (2022 and 2023 are taken.) Certes (talk) 02:44, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is for Good Friday in 2024. It seems reasonable to me. If it is a problem that this template is untranscluded, creating Wikipedia:Picture of the day/March 2024 might resolve that concern. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:07, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • All: Is it actually reasonable? Is it a documented practice somewhere that picture of the day can be reserved 2+ years in advance? I'm fine if that's understood to be common/normal practice, but that bothers me from a basic fairness point of view. --Izno (talk) 05:59, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It is clear that some people here think it is reasonable, and as far as I can see, no valid deletion reason has been provided. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:09, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I see it as a suggestion rather than a reservation. I could boldly replace it by a different picture, leaving the good people at POTD to decide whether my edit is an improvement. Certes (talk) 15:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    And should the nominator become absent? Should we take the "suggestion" as something more or less? I don't mind rescinding my delete !vote, but no one answered me on the point of whether it's an established or allowed practice for POTD. Please consider starting a conversation there on the point, since I'd like to have something to point to in the future should similar templates show up here or even start being created. --Izno (talk) 19:03, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I started a conversation at WT:POTD earlier. The only reply so far suggests no time limit. Certes (talk) 22:19, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There is no time limit, as far as I know, and it seems entirely reasonable to me for this featured picture to be reserved for this Good Friday slot. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:49, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Bothering no-one, no valid reason to delete. --Jayron32 19:02, 22 November 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/2025-04-18

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) 14:29, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's too early to create it at this time. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:38, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Izno (talk) 06:03, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Is there some reason we shouldn't be scheduling POTDs years in advance? I'm not seeing one, and the nominator provides no argument other than a bare assertion. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Too early for such a nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:44, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Scheduled for Good Friday, which is appropriate for the subject. Earlier years are taken. Certes (talk) 02:45, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is for Good Friday in 2025. It seems reasonable to me. If it is a problem that this template is untranscluded, creating Wikipedia:Picture of the day/April 2025 might resolve that concern. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:08, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There is no time limit for listing POTDs, and it seems entirely reasonable to me for this featured picture to be reserved for the Good Friday slot. In fact, it is a good idea, and Hieronymus Bosch will not mind waiting for another couple of years for his picture to appear on this particular date on the Wikipedia Main page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:54, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Bothering no-one, no valid reason to delete. --Jayron32 19:02, 22 November 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:Uses TemplateStyles/example.css

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 per discussion. ✗plicit 12:47, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The CSS page is not used. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as a valid documentation template. --Izno (talk) 06:01, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Izno. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 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:Db-g14/styles.css

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 12:37, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Db-g14/styles.css (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The template does not use this CSS, so we should delete it. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:32, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. These proposed styles should be accounted for when we get around to TemplateStyling the mbox templates. --Izno (talk) 05:58, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:34, 19 November 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:PopcornTimeTree

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 12:46, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:18, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete as single-use (it's actually used at Talk:Popcorn Time/Archive 1#Family tree). * Pppery * it has begun... 18:07, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It was unused because a sockpuppet had removed it. I have restored it to the PopcornTime article, as it visually illustrates the lineage and relationships between the software forks. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:49, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Substitute this one the mainspace then delete. Regardless of the removal by the sockpuppet user, the template doesn't have much usage outside the mainspace. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:46, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    If the issue is that it's single use, I have no objection to substituting it in the article, although those kinds of figures create a rather unwieldy mess in the prose. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:23, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep valid single-use template, removing unwieldy and infrequently edited text from article prose. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:22, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom and Pppery. There's nothing unwieldy about this template (and if there is, that suggests other remedy than keeping it in the template space: either total deletion or a better template). --Izno (talk) 06:00, 18 November 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:Geographic Location 2

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 merge to Template:Adjacent communities. Primefac (talk) 11:44, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Geographic Location 2 with Template:Adjacent communities.
I don't see why we need two of these Frietjes (talk) 15:44, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with merge into Adjacent communities (or Template:Adjacent jurisdictions - better name actually). As far as I can tell, Template:Geographic Location 2 is an old version of Adjacent communities and only has extra compass points. After inserting this template for 1000s of places, I can tell that those extra compass points are not needed and unhelpful. So, just a plain redirect would also suffice if possible. If that is not possible, then those extra compass points should be deprecated or retired. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:21, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't merge. My many pages need the extra compass points provided by GeoLoc2, which are not provided by Adjacent communities. Ron Clausen (talk) 08:25, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The extra directions are needless precision. This template is only a navigational aid to go from one article to the next, not a precise map. If you need to stack multiple places, just use breaks (<br/>), see for example Torsby Municipality.
If this template is kept, it should at least be reformatted to look the same as Adjacent communities. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:18, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with reformatting it to look the same. My issue is losing the information at the hundreds of places that I have used GeoLoc2. If someone is volunteering to make all those updates, let me know. Ron Clausen (talk) 09:19, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
apparently there is a misunderstanding of what "merge means"? I don't see how information is lost by merging. Frietjes (talk) 23:08, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ron Clausen, when you say "do not merge" it seems like you are saying "do not delete". A "merge" would preserve the extra directions. The original proposal was not the delete anything, as far as I can tell. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:29, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, as long as no data is lost, and the extra directions are not lost in the merge. "Merge" sounded to me like the extra directions might be deleted. Looking at this new template on pages it has now appeared sometimes seems awkward because mountains or such are not always exactly "Adjacent", but may be at a distance. Ron Clausen (talk) 20:53, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Location and communities are two separate things. If any town or city has the Geographic location template that it should be removed. It's redundant to the adjacent communities which is used at the bottom of these articles for the county, particularly in the U.S., where the town is in. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:36, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't let the names of the templates fool you: they do the exact same thing (in fact, template:Adjacent communities was formerly template:Geographic location). GeoLoc2 was just a fork of GeoLoc with a few extra compass directions. And as far as I know, there is no instance where an article has both templates. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:07, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
lol, see Template:Geographic location ... Frietjes (talk) 23:09, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:22, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, pretty strange that it was redirected to Adjacent communities instead of Geographic location 2. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:43, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
logs are useful. Frietjes (talk) 21:51, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the edit history but the RM proposal is ridiculous., but I can now see the need for merge, but the Geographic location template that is used in any articles not at the bottom should be removed. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:08, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, two templates that do the same thing. As far as I can tell, all that is required for the merge is to split the row with the up and down arrows into multiple cells. We can always track and/or deprecate the extra 4 directions. Using tables to convey directions is bad for accessibility, but using <br> for lists or in place of table cells is worse. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:26, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, though I would welcome a larger discussion on the utility of these templates at all. --Izno (talk) 22:38, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Izno: FYI, a discussion on this template already took place in the recent past, see Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2017_August_6#Template:Geographic_location. Remember that this template only serves as a navigational tool, similar to other navboxes, it's not meant to be a detailed map. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:31, 29 November 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_November_18&oldid=1059258806"