Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 April 27

April 27

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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 after replacement with {{Infobox settlement}}. — JJMC89(T·C) 00:27, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replace and delete

City-specific wrapper for {{Infobox settlement}}, with limited transclusions, on pretty stable sets of articles. Subst:itution will reduce the maintenance overhead, reduce the cognitive burden for editors, and enable articles to benefit more immediately from improvements to the current parent template.

Very uncommon practice: The only city-specific template outside London. Used for different types of entities [neighborhoods, quarters, but not districts], so the type has to be specified anyway. {{Infobox settlement}} can be used directly.

Note: Despite being named "Infobox settlement" the template is not only used for settlements. Per its documentation, Infobox settlement is "used to produce an Infobox for human settlements (cities, towns, villages, communities) as well as other administrative districts, counties, provinces, et cetera—in fact, any subdivision below the level of a country". That is practice for over a decade, it is used on ~ 500000 articles. 77.13.104.62 (talk) 22:42, 27 April 2019 (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).
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. — JJMC89(T·C) 00:26, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not used in mainspace. No future use in vision: we don't do "trends in p-block" at WT:ELEMENTS nor in periodic table descriptions. DePiep (talk) 19:27, 27 April 2019 (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).

NYNH&H s-line templates

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. — JJMC89(T·C) 00:25, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

S-line subpages

Superseded by New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad. All transclusions replaced. I've put the 22 S-line subpages within a collapsed section; they're wholly dependent on the three main templates and should also be deleted. Mackensen (talk) 18:30, 27 April 2019 (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).
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. — JJMC89(T·C) 00:24, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

no longer used or needed now that the various fb templates are using standardised colours provided by the various lua modules. Frietjes (talk) 16:00, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 09:19, 30 April 2019 (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).
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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 2019 May 5. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:47, 5 May 2019 (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).
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. — JJMC89(T·C) 00:24, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and all players are redlinks so not really navigating between anything. Gonnym (talk) 12:54, 27 April 2019 (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).