Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 April 6

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

April 6

edit

Template:POTD/2005-12-31

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 23:39, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not used on the Picture of the Day archive page for December 2005. Wikipedia:Picture of the day/December 31, 2005 already has the same picture, information, and style. Unnecessary duplication of a subpage. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:09, 6 April 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:Precolonial states in the Philippines location 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 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 23:39, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused map. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:09, 6 April 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:Misamis University

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 23:38, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, two red links, one of which is to a deleted draft article, mainspace article lacks notability hence my PRDO, and largely text. Navbox with no benefit. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:46, 6 April 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:Category warning

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 April 14. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:53, 14 April 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:Infobox song contest/ABU Song Contest 2019

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 undeletion of these templates. ✗plicit 14:56, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates whose purpose is to transclude the image map of participating countries in these events. But none of these events were held making it impossible for use as no article exists for the events for the respective years. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:00, 6 April 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:See also/lions

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 23:48, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Subpages of Template:See also that violate how the See also template is supposed to be used. The see also functions as a hatnote on the top of a section on an article linking related articles to the one you are reading. These three, however, don't function as hatnotes, but as a list to related articles for the respective subjects. The Lions template is used currently on two subpages of the creator. But it should be substituted in the proper format as a top-down list of related articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:24, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, these are just template-ified lists that were previously in the See Also section of the different pages. I'm not sure why the creator felt it necessary to make them, as the original lists were just fine. It doesn't change often enough for it to really be saving an effort. SilverTiger12 (talk) 00:18, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. Some pages in the See also/lions one don't even exist any more. And the other pages linked in the templates are already part of more templates created by the same user. – BhagyaMani (talk) 07:46, 7 April 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).

English women's cricket 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. ✗plicit 14:52, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates, as these are for domestic level competitions, and so being part of a winning team is not a defining characteristic for navigating between these players. There was consensus from a small number of editors at the Cricket WikiProject to delete them, but obviously a full TfD is needed to delete. All are related competitions, so seems fine to bundle these sets of templates together. Also, similar to #BBL/WBBL cricket templates. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:50, 6 April 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:ConvertAbbrev

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) 00:51, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ConvertAbbrev and all of its sub-templates are all unused. Some are without any transclusions while the others have transclusions in Template:ConvertAbbrev/doc which itself is transcluded into the sub-templates and in two archived discussions. The reason these are no longer in use is probably because they were replaced with Module:ISO 3166 and Module:ISO 639 name and their family of templates. Since those are being highly used (with Module:ISO 3166 itself on over 702,000k pages) there is no reason to keep a secondary system that duplicates it. Gonnym (talk) 10:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:26, 6 April 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).

BBL/WBBL cricket 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) 22:55, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary templates, as these are for domestic level competitions. There was consensus from a small number of editors at the Cricket WikiProject to delete them, but obviously a full TfD is needed to delete. Two related competitions, so seems fine to bundle these two sets of templates together. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:21, 6 April 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:Kizaru

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 12:04, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NENAN, only red links The Banner talk 10:12, 6 April 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:NJM color

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) 22:37, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Nanjing Metro. Gonnym (talk) 06:28, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete JackPotte (talk) 18:19, 6 April 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:Help me-helped

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. Primefac (talk) 05:52, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Help me-helped with Template:Help me.
Most other templates (e.g protected edit requests) have a parameter that, when equal to "yes", will produce something similar to this template. This template has a whole different template. I feel it would be easier and more consistent to merge these two templates and have "Help me" have a parameter that automatically produces this (and possibly additional text on the template telling people who use the templates about this parameter) instead. interstatefive  (talk) - just another roadgeek 01:37, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose this merger in isolation. These two templates are part of a whole series of request and response templates (see Template:Help me/doc and the related {{Admin help}} series); the edit request templates are an entirely different series with different functionality and different response templates. One is not better than the other, they just work differently. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:35, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivan - RichT|C|E-Mail 12:45, 11 April 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:CRH color

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) 22:34, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no longer used after being replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/China Railway High-speed Frietjes (talk) 23:26, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 07:30, 7 April 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_April_6&oldid=1082588622"