Page move-protected

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:TfD)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Closing instructions

XFD backlog
  Feb Mar Apr May TOTAL
CfD 1 12 29 82 124
TfD 0 0 19 11 30
MfD 0 0 11 6 17
AfD 0 0 0 0 0

On this page, the deletion or merging of templates and modules, except as noted below, is discussed. To propose the renaming of a template or templates, use Wikipedia:Requested moves.

How to use this page[edit]

What not to propose for discussion here[edit]

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

Stub templates
Stub templates and categories should be listed at Categories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories, unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
Userboxes
Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
Speedy deletion candidates
If the template clearly satisfies a "general" or "template" criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{Db-author}}. If it is an unused, hardcoded instance or duplication of another template, tag it with {{Db-t3|~~~~~|name of other template}}.
Policy or guideline templates
Templates that are associated with particular Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as the speedy deletion templates, cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant guideline.
Template redirects
List at Redirects for discussion.

Reasons to delete a template[edit]

  1. The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance
  2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template
  3. The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used
  4. The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and it can't be fixed through normal editing

Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, WikiProject Templates may be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.

Listing a template[edit]

To list a template for deletion or merging, follow this three-step process. Note that the "Template:" prefix should not be included anywhere when carrying out these steps (unless otherwise specified).

Step Instructions
I: Tag the template. Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:
  • For deletion: {{subst:tfd}}
  • For deletion of a sidebar or infobox template: {{subst:tfd|type=sidebar}}
  • For deletion of an inline template: {{subst:tfd|type=inline}}
  • For deletion of a module: {{subst:tfd|type=module|page=name of module}} at the top of the module's /doc subpage.
  • For merging: {{subst:tfm|name of other template}}
  • For merging an inline template: {{subst:tfm|type=inline|name of other template}}
  • If the template nominated is inline, do not add a newline between the Tfd notice and the code of the template.
  • If the template to be nominated for deletion is protected, make a request for the Tfd tag to be added, by posting on the template's talk page and using the {{editprotected}} template to catch the attention of administrators.
  • For templates designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the Tfd notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template.
  • Do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
    or
    Nominated for merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]].
  • Before saving your edit, preview your edit to ensure the Tfd message is displayed properly.

Multiple templates: If you are nominating multiple related templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with {{subst:tfd|heading=discussion title}} or {{subst:tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}} instead of the versions given above, replacing discussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing the PAGENAME code). Note that TTObot is available to tag templates en masse if you do not wish to do it manually.

Related categories: If including template-populated tracking categories in the Tfd nomination, add {{Catfd|template name}} to the top of any categories that would be deleted as a result of the Tfd, this time replacing template name with the name of the template being nominated. (If you instead chose a meaningful title for a multiple nomination, use {{Catfd|header=title of nomination}} instead.)

TemplateStyles pages: The above templates will not work on TemplateStyles pages. Instead, add a CSS comment to the top of the page:

/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019_May_21#Template:template_name.css */

Protected pages: If you are incapable of tagging a page due to protection, please either leave a note on the page's talk page under a {{edit protected}} header, or leave a note at the Administrators' noticeboard, requesting tagging of the page.

II: List the template at Tfd. Follow this link to edit today's Tfd log.

Add this text at the top, just below the -->:

  • For deletion: {{subst:tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • For merging: {{subst:tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

If the template has had previous Tfds, you can add {{Oldtfdlist|previous Tfd without brackets|result of previous Tfd}} directly after the Tfd2/Catfd2 template.

Use an edit summary such as
Adding [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates: If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:

{{subst:tfd2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ). Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:

{{subst:tfm2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ), plus one more in |with=. |with= does not need to be used, but should be the template that you want the other templates to be merged into. Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

Related categories: If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code after the Tfd2 template but before the text of your rationale:

{{subst:catfd2|category name}}
III: Notify users. Please notify the creator of the template nominated (as well as the creator of the target template, if proposing a merger). It is helpful to also notify the main contributors of the template that you are nominating. To find them, look in the page history or talk page of the template. Then, add one of the following:

to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of the other template for a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to make any interested WikiProjects aware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not use Article alerts.

Multiple templates: There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination: please write a personal message in these cases.

Consider adding any templates you nominate for Tfd to your watchlist. This will help ensure that the Tfd tag is not removed.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors[edit]

While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD (see above), nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that an template be speedily deleted, please give the criterion that it meets, such as "T3" for hardcoded instances.

Notifying related WikiProjects

WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{Tfdnotice}} for this.

Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's Article Alerts automatically, if they subscribe to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the template

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the template and its talkpage that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the page history or talk page.

At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone else will either close the discussion or, where needed, "relist" it for another seven days of discussion. (That "someone" may not be you, the nominator.)

Once you have submitted a template here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is supported, helpful administrators and editors will log the result and ensure that the change is implemented to all affected pages.

Also, consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

Twinkle[edit]

Twinkle is a convenient tool that can perform many of the functions of notification automatically. Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them have automatic alerts. It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.

Discussion[edit]

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the deletion policy and explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommend subst or subst and delete and similar. This means the template text should be "merged" into the articles that use it. Depending on the content, the template page may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.

Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Contents

Current discussions[edit]

May 21[edit]

Template:BT fare[edit]

Per WP:NOTTRAVEL it is not the job of an encyclopedia to inform readers how much the bus costs, transcluded on five articles all of which appear non-notable anyhow. Ajf773 (talk) 22:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

@Ajf773: I know this is only partly related but should parameters like |fare= be removed from {{Infobox bus line}} per WP:NOTTRAVEL? I just made the template to have editors only edit one area to update the fare, but if the fare shouldn't be displayed on any of the articles than I don't mind if this gets deleted, but if the fares are staying, oppose deleting this template. BrandonXLF (t@lk) 22:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I agree those parameters should be removed from the infobox as well. I discussed this on the talk page but didn't have much response. Ajf773 (talk) 22:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Ministry of Railways (Pakistan)[edit]

Fails WP:NENAN: it has only two links apart from the head article. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:13, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Anne Rice Vampire Chronicles tree[edit]

WP:FANCRUFT. Misuse of navbox. Should probably be reformatted and included once at List of The Vampire Chronicles characters if at all. --woodensuperman 14:57, 9 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Strong Keep, (??) no reason to get rid of an interesting and informative template like this. I can see putting some templates up for deletion, but not good ones. Thanks. (p.s. WP:FANCRUFT is an opinion essay, not a guideline or policy) Randy Kryn (talk) 16:23, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
This isn't a proper WP:NAVBOX. There is already a navbox at {{The Vampire Chronicles}} which contains all the characters. This one does not need to be transcluded on every article. If this information is kept it should appear once only (at List of The Vampire Chronicles characters) in a different format. --woodensuperman 07:55, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Although {{The Vampire Chronicles}} template lists the 13 individual character articles this one shows many more, as well as giving readers the interesting familial relationships and timeline. Readers (at least me) find it interesting and informative. It improves the encyclopedia, improves the pages it is (and can be) placed on, and is a fine addition to Wikipedia's Vampire Chronicles collection. There is nothing wrong with it. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
There is everything wrong with it. It's content masquerading as a navbox. It certainly does not belong along the bottom of multiple pages. If this was a single use template sitting at List of The Vampire Chronicles characters, I'd probably have left it alone, but what the hell is it doing sitting at the bottom of Anne Rice? This needs at the very least converted to a different format, and used sparingly on extremely relevant articles. Something like Aztec emperors family tree, or Noldor#House of Finwë. This is NOT a WP:NAVBOX. --woodensuperman 12:39, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Anne Rice is linked in the title. The family tree helps the understanding of the linked pages, and provides the readers with a valuable visual aide concept map to the topic. And it improves rather than harms the encyclopedia (which is what all of these discussions are about). Randy Kryn (talk) 13:23, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
She may be linked in the title, but this isn't a navbox and the content is tangential to her biography. And cluttering up pages with family trees disguised as navboxes on irrelevant pages does harm the encyclopedia and certainly does not improve the experience for anyone. --woodensuperman 13:38, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
"for anyone" is incorrect, when I first saw the template it was interesting and informative to my mental-map of the topic. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:50, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
You may find it "interesting", but that doesn't stop it from being in the wrong place. --woodensuperman 13:57, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Your link is to another opinion essay. Interesting is a good descriptor of one of the many attributes a good template can have. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:51, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • The template should not be used as a navbox at the bottom of the page, but there are other family tree templates. There are appropriate uses for them. This is more a question of where it should be used and how the template should be formatted. The template should not be deleted just because of those things. If there are no other uses for it, it could be included just at the page mentioned in the nom, but it could be neater to keep the code as a separate template page. M.Clay1 (talk) 05:59, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Is there any reason it is using the navbox markup? If this is changed, then editors might not mistake it for a navbox and use it as such. --woodensuperman 07:54, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
For whatever reason, family tree templates use navbox markup. I don't think many people would confuse it for a navbox. I've never seen one used as a navbox before. Its use as such seems like a unilateral decision by User:Randy Kryn. I think most editors will agree that it shouldn't be there. M.Clay1 (talk) 03:07, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
It seems {{Downton Abbey family tree}} and {{Half-elven family tree}} manage to not use the navbox markup. I would suggest that this method be employed by all family tree templates. --woodensuperman 14:11, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 16:27, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:High heels[edit]

Propose merging Template:High heels with Template:Footwear.
Arguably redudant, much of the essential contents are already in destination template. As for the "Brands/firms people", quite some warning of commercial content there, isn't it? I doubt listing this secltion, for whatever criteria, is motivated in such a template. PPEMES (talk) 21:44, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EggRoll97 (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Parts of a crown[edit]

Propose merging Template:Parts of a crown with Template:Types of crowns.
Might as well merge to form a "Crowns" template? PPEMES (talk) 21:39, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, EggRoll97 (talk) 14:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Culture of The Bodos[edit]

Confusing template that is not helpful to find the info it suggests to give The Banner talk 10:45, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Bangladesh district[edit]

Replace and delete

District-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.

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".

Other entities (divisions, upazilas, cities, villages ...) already transclude {{Infobox settlement}} directly.

Visualisation of Bangladesh place infobox usage
Infobox usage on articles about places in Bangladesh

78.54.90.109 (talk) 09:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Alex Skolnick Trio[edit]

This non-notable band was merged into one of its member's' article and that article is the only one that uses the template since all of the albums also redirect back to the member's article. Aspects (talk) 05:28, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Copyright-EU[edit]

Propose merging Template:Copyright-EU with Template:Intellectual property laws of the European Union.
Overlapping templates. {{Intellectual property laws of the European Union}} was just recently merged with {{Trademark-EU}} per this TfD for the same reasons. Gonnym (talk) 19:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

 Comment: Make it so, the navbox with red links clobbers Special:WantedPages with inflated numbers. –84.46.52.219 (talk) 07:33, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 03:53, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Away goals[edit]

This template reproduces a simple wikilink that would be better off written in wikicode than having to call a template every time. This is not what templates are for. Every instance of this template should be subst'ed and then the template should be deleted. – PeeJay 09:41, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 09:50, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Subst and delete per nom, not needed. GiantSnowman 09:50, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand. A category should be added to the template to track matches where it was applied. It's more consistent to use the template and its redirects. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:47, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
    • Why add a category when you can just check the "What links here" page? – PeeJay 22:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand per Walter. The templates are better for consistency. Bmf 051 (talk) 16:46, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
    • In what way? If people want to write something different than what the template displays, they can do so by simply not using the template. It is utterly pointless. – PeeJay 22:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Subst and delete This has no reason to be in a template as opposed to standard wikitext. * Pppery * survives 00:23, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 03:53, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Death in Germanic mythology[edit]

Propose merging Template:Death in Germanic mythology with Template:Germanic pagan practices.
Do you think this one could be merge, for convenience? PPEMES (talk) 17:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Like above, this template functions as a collection of items for a specialized topic. Merging it would contribute to template bloat. :bloodofox: (talk) 20:03, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 03:22, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Bloated? Come on. It wouldn't be a large template. PPEMES (talk) 11:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Kings of Italy (1861–1946)[edit]

Propose merging Template:Kings of Italy (1861–1946) with Template:Heads of State of Italy.
Not sure. But following the precedent of the merged Template:Heads of state of France as well as Template:Former monarchies Italian peninsula, ought the same thing happen to the 'heads of state' of 'Italy'? PPEMES (talk) 20:22, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose. I think this oversimplifies the notion of "Italy". The name is applied—and misapplied—to different states of varying boundaries, societies, languages, etc. The economy of one single template may seem appealing, but I think it's misleading to casual readers. The encyclopedia should help people to see factual nuances more clearly. For the same reason, I don't think the bloated mega-merge of Template:Heads of state of France was decided correctly, and I don't think it's a viable precedent for anything. SteveStrummer (talk) 20:51, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 03:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Antique Kings of Italy[edit]

Propose merging Template:Antique Kings of Italy with Template:Heads of State of Italy.
Per below. PPEMES (talk) 20:22, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Basically, oversimplification. See below. SteveStrummer (talk) 20:55, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 03:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Viking Invasion of England[edit]

Propose merging Template:Viking Invasion of England with Template:Scandinavian England.
Seems like much overlapping scope. Might as well merge? PPEMES (talk) 14:18, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment There is a bit of a cultural difference at the high level here, with one template suggesting That parts of England were once called "Scandinavian England" and is, or was, a place. "Viking Invasion" is "limited", in name, anyway, to an event (series of events). If I had to go with one name it would be the latter. I like the "Viking Invasion" structure a little better. I wonder if "Scandinavian England" might be split, with most merged into "Viking Invasion," the other maybe more cultural to "Danelaw England." Student7 (talk) 20:49, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Note: Template:Scandinavian England has been renamed to Template:Norse activity in the British Isles. PPEMES (talk) 11:57, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 03:20, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

May 20[edit]

Template:Image hoax[edit]

If an image is being used to support a hoax, the article in question should be tagged. I don't see why we need a separate template for files alone. funplussmart (talk) 22:45, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep. You can have an image without an article, negating your sole reason for deletion. MarkZusab (talk) 07:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: In case someone else has anything to say
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:27, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Mosques in Lebanon[edit]

Unused navbox with only 4 links. WP:NENAN Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:51, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

  • It can be expanded with the dozen or so articles in Category:Mosques in Lebanon. – Uanfala (talk) 22:34, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Use - I've added the links to the template, which Uanfala refereed to, This seems like a decent scope template. --Gonnym (talk) 11:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Now has more links, but is still unused
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 03:47, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Update: I've added the template to the articles it links to. – Uanfala (talk) 13:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist to see if people are happy with the current solution
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:26, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:List of world's fairs in Nordic countries[edit]

Propose merging Template:List of world's fairs in Nordic countries with Template:List of world exhibitions.
Some duplicate entries. Seems like this could be merged? PPEMES (talk) 11:21, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

How would you merge them? Pelmeen10 (talk) 17:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
But adding the material that doesn't preexist in the destination. PPEMES (talk) 14:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm a bit confused (not super used to commenting on discussions) - but why does this exist twice? (I commented in the other entry) Icarusgeek (talk) 15:37, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
That's the implied question of this request. PPEMES (talk) 14:27, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Note: This TFD was listed twice and the template was never properly tagged for discussion. Perhaps this should be fixed and relisted? StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 15:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:24, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:2010 Santosh Trophy Cluster I[edit]

unused after being merged (with attribution) with the parent article per consensus at WT:FOOTY Frietjes (talk) 13:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 12:45, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Topic series doc[edit]

Propose discussing Template:Topic series doc.
So, this is probably a weird nomination (since I just created this template only a few minutes ago)...

People might right remember the discussions that happened on sidebars. You know those "[Person's name] series" templates? Well, I looked at the documentation on a few after creating {{Tom DeLay series}}. I learned a bunch of them had copy/pasted docs, and I figured I should possibly do something about that.

Basically, I am looking to replace a bunch of /doc subpages with this template. I have currently implemented this template at {{Tom DeLay series}}, {{Xi Jinping sidebar}}, and {{Gary Johnson series}} for the purposes of this TfD.

Is this template redundant to the doc subpages, and should it be deleted? –MJLTalk 05:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC) CE 00:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:26, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment @MJL: It seems like you erroneously added the TfM notice instead of the TfD notice in this edit.
  • Keep, but make it more clear that it's a metatemplate for documentation. Instead of placing the main content in {{documentation}}, make the {{documentation|content=}} contain the documentation for the metatemplate. Then it could be used by placing {{documentation|Template:Topic series doc}} on templates that use this page for documentation instead of placing placing {{Topic series doc}}. I'll might make an example in Template:Topic series doc/sandbox (I can definitely do so if you want me to).
  • You can also see an example of this with some template pages I created for this: Template:GAN subtemplates, Template:GAR subtemplates (this is a bit of a different situation, though, because I'm planning to modularize these components and TfD them in the somewhat near future.) Retro (talk | contribs) 23:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Listen/core[edit]

Unused following the creation of Module:Listen and this edit by Mr. Stradivarius in 2014 DannyS712 (talk) 05:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Население[edit]

After unraveling the excessively complicated code, this is nothing more than a template that is used to store data, and each piece of data it stores is used on one or zero pages. * Pppery * survives 23:57, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

  • The Russian equivalent of the template (ru:Шаблон:Население) is used on over 74,000 pages, so I'd assume having an English equivalent at least helps when translating articles from there. – Uanfala (talk) 14:34, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:14, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Dorothy Davenport[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 keep. Nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure) DannyS712 (talk) 07:46, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Includes no links - violates WP:EXISTING. DannyS712 (talk) 02:12, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Comment: Links have been added by the creator, however, there is still many unlinked (and redlinked) items in the navbox. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 22:34, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
If I might ask - how may links do you need to justify an actor/actress/director's template? As more silent films are added to wikipedia, more links will be created for this very famous silent film actress. This template provides an instant access to this actress's body of work in several areas. I'm just curious, of all the actor/actress/director templates in wikipedia - why was this one singled out?

Thanks Mtjannetta (talk) 15:07, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:11, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Keep. I have removed performances per WP:PERFNAV. At least 20 of the films, about half, are linked now. Nomination rationale is no longer valid. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:44, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
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:2016 NCAA Division I baseball independents standings[edit]

Unused standings template. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:21, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

It is used now.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:15, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 01:11, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:34, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Chronology of military events in the American Civil War[edit]

unused MASSIVE navbox. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:24, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep: First of all, this template is within the scope of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history. Then, it is an extension at a chronological level of this template: Template:American Civil War wich it is linked: see navbox "Combatants Theaters Campaigns Battles States" in "Template:American Civil War". Furthermore, the number of its navbox is lower than that of "Template:American Civil War". It was more useful (for Wikipedia Community) "alive" than "dead": can, where appropriate, also be modified rather than deleted! Finally, this template is cleary designated to help the users to navigate in the American Civil War "in the timeframe" related to: "Campaigns", "Battles" plus one general "Appendix" >>> No valid reason for deletion: improve (it is possible) do not destroy! User talk:FDRMRZUSA (26 March 2019; 15,45 UTC+1).
  • Keep. The template is not unused but used subordinate to another template. However I agree that this is not optimal and could need some thoughts and work; e.g. usage on its own and the Appendix section being either deleted or replaced with a link to the aforementioned superior template. ...GELongstreet (talk) 15:31, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep – As GELongstreet says, it's not unused, it's linked through Template:American Civil War on 600 or so pages. But I agree it could use some rework, with the appendix surgically removed. Mojoworker (talk) 15:46, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Since someone undid my change which nested this template in Template:American Civil War, saying it should be merged, I concur and support merging this template into Template:American Civil War (which may be the best long term solution), with keep as second choice. Mojoworker (talk) 01:04, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The template is linked to repeatedly, but still has no transclusions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 01:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Just to clarify, it's not linked from those articles directly, but through another template (Template:American Civil War). And while it shouldn't be linked in that way, it should instead be transcluded as a nested template, but kept nonetheless. It's not really a candidate to be converted to an article, as it really is a template. Mojoworker (talk) 22:54, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and been WP:BOLD and made the transclusion. Mojoworker (talk) 22:56, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
While I was gone on vacation someone undid my change, saying it should be merged instead of nested, so I'm switching to merge (see above). Mojoworker (talk) 01:04, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
  • convert to an article or delete if there is already an article. links from navboxes should generally point to articles, not to content hidden in other navboxes. Frietjes (talk) 14:37, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The argument that this template "is useful" is somewhat evenly matched by the long-standing belief that templates holding what is essentially article-space content (whether in navbox form or directly storing article text) should not be linked to directly. Given that this template was viewed less than 10 times a day before this TFD nomination the "is useful" argument is somewhat weakened. At this point it's a tossup between deleting outright and converting into some sort of article (which can then still be linked from {{American Civil War}}); I would like to see more opinions on which way this should go before a final decision is reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:22, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • What's wrong with merging it into Template:American Civil War? Mojoworker (talk) 20:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @Zackmann08, FDRMRZUSA, GELongstreet, DannyS712, Mojoworker, Primefac, and Frietjes: Comment. I made Draft:Chronology of military events in the American Civil War and would like your thoughts. Would this page suffice as a list-class article? –MJLTalk 19:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
    • definitely an improvement over the navbox, and has room for expansion/elaboration. Frietjes (talk) 19:31, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
    • From the comments above by FDRMRZUSA (the original creator of the template), he meant it as "an extension at a chronological level of this template: Template:American Civil War". That template is already large, but I understand FDRMRZUSA's logic in creating this template as an extension of it, even if the execution of the task was unorthodox. It wasn't intended as a list article, but go ahead and create one as a fork for its own sake if you think it has value, but aside from being organized by campaign, the data is redundant with that of List of American Civil War battles. I still think it should be merged into Template:American Civil War, so that it would be similar to this diff. Mojoworker (talk) 20:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
    • I fully share Mojoworker’s comment (thank you Mojoworker). The page “Draft:Chronology of military events in the American Civil War” is boring read and horrible (even if improved in future): it did not the advantgaes of a navbox. The chronological events are effectively expressed by a navbox visual potential. Honestly I are unable to understand the problem that exists there keep alive my template: aren’t there larger problems in Wikipedia??? FDRMRZUSA (talk) 23:01, 21 May 2019 (UTC+1)

May 19[edit]

Template:Form factors[edit]

Unused navbox. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:07, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — JJMC89(T·C) 00:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 23:52, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Super Over[edit]

Template includes ball-by-ball detail which is excessive and no reliable source is providing for verification. SocietyBox (talk) 20:54, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Added the module, which should clearly suffer the same fate as the template. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 21:10, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete This is an overly esoteric way of essentially saying X team won in extra time. As the nom says, it fails WP:V. All the cricket scorecards will show that a team beat another team in the super over, and that's all we need to add to matches on WP when that applies. Adding the whole template for a single over for one match is a hugh distraction to the rest of the fixture. If someone wants a more detailed breakdown of what happened, ball by ball, they can find it elsewhere. There's no need to replicate it on WP. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:42, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete this is just WP:FANCRUFT, no need for such a detailed template on an over of cricket. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:36, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment I can see some very slight value in keeping it, but only for matches where there is detailed coverage of the match on the article page (including a full scorecard), which would typically only be tournament finals. Using alongside a standard {{Single-innings cricket match}} is completely disproportionate: the Super Over template is 10 lines long, a basic usage of the match template is 5 lines long. Spike 'em (talk) 08:46, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep This is similar to penalties in football. However, I agree that it need not be that detailed. 117.198.112.144 (talk) 19:00, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep , it's shows a special innings (Super Over) in T20 cricket. For a whole match we update the singl innings template, just like that super over is also should be shown. Nivas88 (talk) 19:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment - Keep, How can you are not getting source about Super over for the inngings. Super over Scorecard is available in the original link of that match. It's so funny Lol...
If super over template will delete then add another single innings template to show super over details... 2405:204:610F:AC6A:97F9:E182:439A:E12F (talk) 08:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete - this is way too much detail and would be better served by a sentence of prose added as a note, if necessary, to the template dealing with the match scorecard. Even that is essentially a MIRROR of something that would be even better served by an external link to one of the many places that cricket scorecards are kept online. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:29, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete Unnecessarily long and verbose. Also, what's the point of having a bowler column and putting the same name 6 times? sudhanva (talk) 03:25, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • delete, overly detailed and rarely properly sourced. Frietjes (talk) 13:44, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep - To address comments that this is too detailed, I propose that the "Bowler" column be dropped, since the entire is bowled by a single nominated bowler. Also, the "Batsman" column should be called "Batter" so that it can also be used for women's matches. MadScientist (talk) 22:28, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I have notified WP:CRICKET.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 23:40, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete. Per nom. Lugnuts summed it up perfectly. It's not needed. StickyWicket (talk) 16:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject International law[edit]

This template is no longer in use. According to WP:Wikiproject International law, it is no longer to be used. I have replaced all remaining instances of it with the International relations box. StudiesWorld (talk) 22:10, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:FailedGA/Small[edit]

Unused, except for one use in an archive here. Unnecessary because {{FailedGA}} has a |small= parameter. eπi (talk | contribs) 13:18, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Genome header[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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 11:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

No longer used, probably not that much use from the beginning Artoria2e5 🌉 01:05, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Delete. Table headers are by their nature, wont to change, and standardizing templates can be tricky as a result. Unused table header templates are certainly unnecessary. eπi (talk | contribs) 11:28, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    Just as an additional note, this edit is where the header was originally added, and Artoria2e5 changed the table format in this edit. eπi (talk | contribs) 21:30, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
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).

GA quick-fail user talk messages[edit]

Propose merging Template:QF-NPOV, Template:QF-source, Template:QF-tags, Template:QF-unfolding and Template:QF-unstable with Template:QF.
I've just created {{QF}} to merge the functionality of all these templates. It takes no more typing to put the rationale into a parameter (|) instead of a hyphen (-) after the template. Since the templates are subst-only, no transclusion cleanup is required, so these can be cleanly deleted. eπi (talk | contribs) 00:08, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Merge per nom.--Esprit15d • talkcontribs 09:42, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

May 18[edit]

Template:Small/styles.css[edit]

Not used (implementation reverted by author, see Special:Diff/859227814) DannyS712 (talk) 20:37, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:2014 Swedish football Division 1 Norra table[edit]

unused after being merged (with attribution) with the parent article per consensus at WT:FOOTY Frietjes (talk) 13:01, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 11:38, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Chiroptera[edit]

Content is unverifiable, contradictory to the articles it appears at, and at best, redundant. cygnis insignis 08:20, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox South Korean neighborhood[edit]

Replace and delete

South Korea dong-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.

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".

Counties, provinces, and several entities of other types already transclude {{Infobox settlement}} directly.

Visualisation of South Korea place infobox usage
Infobox usage on articles about places in South Korea

Most settlements of Asia and Latin America and all of continental Africa use only the standard infobox.

English Wikipedia usage of place infoboxes.svg
  • green : Infobox settlement (only)
  • turquoise: 1 Infobox settlement wrapper having less than 10000 transclusions (light 0-99, medium 100-999, dark 1000-9999 transclusions) and optionally Infobox settlement
  • blue : >1 Infobox settlement wrapper and optionally Infobox settlement (light: 1 wrapper [>10000 transclusions], medium : 2 wrappers, dark : 3+ wrappers)
  • red : other infobox(es) (light: 1, medium : 2, dark : >2 infoboxes) and optionally Infobox settlement and wrappers

Data source: Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Geography and place#Place

77.11.217.119 (talk) 10:55, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment on type and replacement procedure: The transclusions are restricted to the type "dong". The wrapper could state in the code "type= dong". Also, "pushpin_map = South Korea" could be hardcoded. Then the dongs could go through replacement / subst:itution. 89.12.170.179 (talk) 13:28, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

May 17[edit]

Template:Nenhum de Nós[edit]

This band's navigational template consists of one valid link: the band's article. The template has a lot of redlinks, two albums redirected back to the band's article for being non-notable and a related band article that does not include this template. This navigational template navigates nowhere, is unnecessary and WP:NENAN. Aspects (talk) 04:27, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

May 16[edit]

Template:Dangerous[edit]

This template was only relevant when {{High-use}} and {{High-risk}} were two separate templates, but they have been merged in this TfD.

This survived a previous TfD, but the circumstances are different now. eπi (talk | contribs) 21:24, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

New York and Long Branch Railroad s-line templates[edit]

S-line data modules

{{S-line}} templates for the New York and Long Branch Railroad. Superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/New York and Long Branch Railroad. All transclusions replaced. There are also two dependent s-line data modules to be deleted. Mackensen (talk) 13:11, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Missouri Pacific Railroad s-line templates[edit]

S-line data modules

{{S-line}} templates for the Missouri Pacific Railroad. Superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Missouri Pacific Railroad. Sole article-space transclusion replaced. There are also two dependent s-line data modules to be deleted. Mackensen (talk) 12:58, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Pennsylvania Railroad s-line templates[edit]

S-line data modules

{{S-line}} templates for the Pennsylvania Railroad. Superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Pennsylvania Railroad. All transclusions replaced. There are also 72 dependent s-line data modules to be deleted. Mackensen (talk) 12:58, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Trinity Metro s-line templates[edit]

S-line data modules

{{S-line}} templates for Trinity Metro, which runs TEXRail. Superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Trinity Metro. All transclusions replaced. There are also two dependent s-line data modules to be deleted. Mackensen (talk) 12:58, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Spoken Wikipedia/Temp[edit]

Unused template, no edits since 2009. Presumably some sort of test page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:24, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:TXSenateSuccession box[edit]

Redundant template. All uses have been replaced (I've just replaced the final 3 hidden in user space) with the standard set of s-bef/s-ttl/s-aft. WP:SBS/T Cabayi (talk) 10:13, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Prefecture Japan[edit]

Replace and delete

Prefecture-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.

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".

Other entities either use Infobox city Japan or transclude {{Infobox settlement}} directly. No reason found, why 49 prefectures shall have their own wrapper.

Visualisation of Japan place infobox usage
Infobox usage on articles about places in Japan

78.54.185.74 (talk) 00:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

  • The template was kept in this TfD from 2011. – Uanfala (talk) 15:19, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    • My argument in that discussion - at which point the wrapper was unused - was "Keep or redirect to Infobox Settlement; to discourage creation of a new, redundant template." That does preclude replacement and deletion now. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace and delete per nom. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep, it makes maintenance of the articles a lot harder. After a merge, and a year from now: E.g. how do you check that all Japanese articles still links to Prefectures of Japan, Municipalities of Japan and so on? With a template or wrapper its done automatic. How do you check it for all the articles about Egyptian settlements? Christian75 (talk) 22:22, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

May 15[edit]

Template:Contains Akan text[edit]

This template was only used on Ghana national football team, but I've removed it there because there were (AFAIK) no Akan special characters on that page. Also, as far as I can find (we don't have a lot of info about the Akan alphabet onwiki), the Akan language only uses Latin characters and some IPA symbols, which are probably well supported on almost all platforms. rchard2scout (talk) 10:52, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:55, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Contains Ashanti text[edit]

Same as Contains Akan text. Barely used, and the only special characters that this language uses are the "open o" (`ɔ`) and epsilon (`ɛ`), which are part of IPA and generally well-supported. rchard2scout (talk) 18:00, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:55, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:MoreInfo[edit]

Propose merging Template:MoreInfo, Template:Notsure, Template:Investigating and Template:LEG? with Template:Question.
This set of templates all feature a blue question mark inside a blue circle with some text. {{Question}} offers the option to customize the text, as such there really is no reason why there should be a different template for every variation of text anyone can think of, when it can be done with {{Question|label=foo}}. Gonnym (talk) 13:14, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Need more comments
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:47, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep We still use all of these templates at SPI (except LEG? and Question). I don't see an issue with keeping shorthand templates, might as well remove {{=}} and use HTML syntax directly. The key differentiator is user experience. --qedk (t c) 15:35, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
    • It's just pointless having the same exact template 5 times in this example (there are others of this kind with even more). Just write what you want in the free-form text like any other template is made to work. This system just leads to endless versions. --Gonnym (talk) 21:40, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
      • @Gonnym: How is it pointless? If they're being used with the default text, they're not pointless. It's not more convenient to type more text if you used to have a shorthand. On the large scale, it might simplify the user experience by having less templates to choose from, but it certainly doesn't seem to simplify the experience for the existing users.
      • Drawing from a personal example, I think it's more productive to merge templates that aren't being used with their default text. eπi (talk | contribs) 11:49, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
      • @Gonnym: As an additional note, I'm in favor of template simplification where templates are functionally equivalent or identical in purpose. I just don't think that's the case here. eπi (talk | contribs) 16:38, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
    • @QEDK: You said We still use all of these templates at SPI, but that is inaccurate. {{moreinfo}} is the only one that has been used at SPI. However, this doesn't appear to affect the rest of your point. eπi (talk | contribs) 16:38, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still more comments needed
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:54, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep. {{moreinfo}} is used frequently at SPI. LEG? seems to be a very specialized template for List of Ediacaran genera. Overall, I don't see any harm in keeping these around – merging them seems to create more work than it saves. Mz7 (talk) 06:35, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep We use {{moreinfo}} at SPI. Agree with Mz7 that this creates a lot of work for mergers and for those who code our SPI page and scripts. Katietalk 14:43, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep, with one caveat {{LEG?}} merits separate discussion as part of a set of 4 similar unused subst-only templates; I'll open a TfD after this one is closed, if no one else beats me to it. For the other four, here's the number of direct transclusions:
  • {{notsure}} and {{investigating}} are rarely used, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're worth deleting. I suppose we could go back and replace all the transclusions with {{question|label=Not sure.}} and {{question|label=Investigating}}, but I don't think template simplification outweighs the costs of disturbing already-completed discussions or denying these options to future users. {{moreinfo}} should clearly remain a separate template. eπi (talk | contribs) 12:40, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Module:Other uses2[edit]

Propose merging Module:Other uses2 with Module:Other uses.
If there really needs to two templates for this, then this module should be handled as another function inside Module:Other uses. Gonnym (talk) 17:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Delete Module:Other uses2 without merging; unnecessary lua module, can be implemented in Wikitext. See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 September 23#Module:Other uses2. (Trivia: I believe that this may be the first ever module merge that wasn't nominated by me). * Pppery * has returned 18:47, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Merge or delete: the functionality of adding the disambiguation suffix is somewhat needless; I'd support deleting {{Template:Other uses2}} entirely, merging its uses to {{other uses}} with manual addition of "(disambiguation)" as necessary. The former saves some effort for power users, but it's otherwise needless maintenance bloat and extra confusion for newbies. If the template is to be kept, then yes, I've got no problem with simply merging the functionality into the other module—its separate nature is just an artifact of piecemeal Lua-fication of the templates. That said, I strongly oppose implementing the template as a wikitext injection to {{other uses}} in the way that Pppery proposed in the earlier TfD, with the same rationale as I mentioned there. As reference, I'm currently the sole author of both modules. {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 03:51, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
    Just to be clear, all of the options you have suggested are preferable to me to the status quo of having two separate modules. * Pppery * has returned 20:35, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think this needs a bit more input on how a merger/offboarding-of-purpose ought to take place
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:51, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Design-EU[edit]

Propose merging Template:Design-EU with Template:Intellectual property laws of the European Union.
Overlapping templates. {{Intellectual property laws of the European Union}} was just recently merged with {{Trademark-EU}} per this TfD for the same reasons. Gonnym (talk) 19:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 00:56, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete: I don't know much about the topic area, but since the intellectual property rights template has a section for design rights already, having a separate small design rights navbox seems superfluous. I did a spot-check and added the one missing link Hague Agreement from {{Design-EU}} to {{Intellectual property laws of the European Union}}. eπi (talk | contribs) 00:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This needs a bit more commentary
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:49, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:32TeamBracket-Compact-NoSeeds[edit]

Folk of {{32TeamBracket-Compact|seeds=no}} Hhkohh (talk) 14:02, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment would the two work in the same way?-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 01:22, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
    UCO2009bluejay, the only difference is that one invoke module while the other do not. But both output and usage is the same Hhkohh (talk) 02:12, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 07:12, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • replace with {{32TeamBracket|compact=yes|seeds=no and delete. Frietjes (talk) 13:48, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A bit more input is needed
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:48, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete and replace. When it takes basically the same amount of typing to use two templates as one, there's no reason to split the code between two. eπi (talk | contribs) 00:06, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment See User:Nigej/sandbox which shows that the replacement is not actually identical to the original, just similar. The "score" field is more compact in the replacement and in addition the replacement causes some wrapping issues for me, again being more compact (see Charles Whitcombe/Ernest Riseborough). Nigej (talk) 12:20, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    @Nigej: Can you take a screenshot of the wrapping issues you refer to? I don't see any from the sandbox example you gave, but I probably missed them.
    In any case, {{32TeamBracket-Compact|seeds=no}} can probably be revised to remove these differences, but this was good to bring up. eπi (talk | contribs) 12:31, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    Not sure how to upload a screenshot. In any case the issue seems to be that the column is created somewhat narrower than the original and when displayed, my browser decides to split Charles and Whitcombe, so they appear on different lines. Nigej (talk) 13:03, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    Nigej, to eliminate wrapping, you can use the auto width syntax. not sure why this isn't the default for all of them. Frietjes (talk) 20:44, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
    Thanks, no wrapping now. Columns somewhat narrower still, but not really an issue I think. Nigej (talk) 21:15, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Transit visibility table[edit]

All but four of the 28 non-header articles were deleted by AfD in 2016. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 00:31, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

  • I'm neutral on this one but you might want to check whatever tool you used to emplace the Deletion Notice as it messed up the link to this discussion. I've fixed it but you might also like to check any other templates you've nominated just in case. —Phil | Talk 14:17, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:46, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Venezuelan municipality[edit]

Replace and delete

Municipality-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.

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".

States, towns, villages etc. already transclude {{Infobox settlement}} directly. 78.55.48.101 (talk) 08:19, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox townlands[edit]

Replace and delete

Northern Ireland townland-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.

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".

Counties, towns, villages etc. already transclude {{Infobox settlement}} directly.

Visualisation of Northern Ireland place infobox usage
Infobox usage on articles about places in Northern Ireland

89.12.139.236 (talk) 13:33, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment. If this were to be deleted, then shouldn't the template to replace it be {{Infobox UK place}} (which is the template used for settlements in Northern Ireland)? – Uanfala (talk) 10:34, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
    • No - look at the pie chart above. Infobox UK place does not feature; and the nominated template is a wrapper for Infobox settlement, not a wrapper for Infobox UK place. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:09, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
    • No - the nominated template is a wrapper for Infobox settlement, not a wrapper for Infobox UK place. "is the template used for settlements in Northern Ireland" - No, only for some. 89.12.191.4 (talk) 18:31, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • The template was extensively discussed in 2012, with an outcome of "no consensus". – Uanfala (talk) 15:17, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    • The closing summary of that debate said "Perhaps a good first step would be to refactor the template as a frontend, and then discuss the merits of having the template as a frontend vs. substituting it.". The refactoring has been done; this is the discussion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:11, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace and delete per nom. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:09, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace and delete, same reason as for London borough [1], too many different boxes for the UK, all with low number of transclusions. JelgavaLV (talk) 20:02, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

May 14[edit]

Template:Gregorian chants of the Roman mass[edit]

Propose merging Template:Gregorian chants of the Roman mass with Template:Mass of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church.
While destination template is already quite populated, you could argue that in some techninal topics still offered as an overview, some maximalism tend to occur here on Wikipedia. Though, if insisted upon, some contents in the destination template may perhaps be moved to the more general scope of Template:Sacraments, rites, and liturgies of the Catholic Church, and some calender-related stuff to Template:Liturgical year of the Catholic Church? PPEMES (talk) 11:21, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't even understand the request. Why would you want to merge chants here, and liturgy there? Apples and pears, it seems, common noun only that they have to do with the Catholic Church. What I'd suggest is getting rid of "Roman" in the titles, - our prime topic for Catholic Church is that one. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:20, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Having looked closer, I don't understand "Gregorian" in this template title, because Kyrie is chanted many melodies in today's Catholic mass, not only Gregorian, - and perhaps that way - just as part of the mass - a merge might make sense. On the other hand, Kyrie is also part of [[Missa_brevis#Kyrie–Gloria_masses|Lutheran masses}}, it's more general than merely Catholic. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:55, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comments The "Roman" in the titles refers specifically to the Roman Rite, which is the most common form of liturgy in the Catholic Church, but not the only one, and omitting it would render the names of the navboxes inaccurate. That said, I think we can leave out the "of the Latin Church" part as overly wordy and unneeded. As for the second template, it's purpose is to highlight the parts of the mass that have standard Gregorian Chant settings. But those are just the parts of the Mass and already included in the more general template (indeed, I don't think there's any link in the Gregorian Chant template that is not in the Mass template. I don't really think we need both. More than a merge, should just delete the Chant template as a redundant template. oknazevad (talk) 18:00, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Papacy[edit]

Propose merging Template:Papacy with Template:Holy See.
Not sure myself, but perhaps arguments could be evaluated. There's arguably a significant content overlapping. The thing is, part of what's confined to the Papacy template might as well be included in the Holy See template, and the other way around to some extent. If merged, indeed a section "Papacy" with subsections pretty much (merged) retained from the previously merged Papacy template would probably be needed. Again, not sure, though. PPEMES (talk) 00:22, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Reach of the European Union[edit]

Propose merging Template:Reach of the European Union with Template:European Union topics.
Might as well keep this in one, collected overvew? PPEMES (talk) 23:49, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Substantive human rights[edit]

Propose merging Template:Substantive human rights with Template:Human rights.
Might as well keep this in a one glance template? PPEMES (talk) 23:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Culture by religion[edit]

Propose merging Template:Culture by religion with Template:Culture.
Might as well incorporate this to keep it in a collected overview? PPEMES (talk) 23:44, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Periods of the History of Europe[edit]

Propose merging Template:Periods of the History of Europe with Template:History of Europe.
Redundancy. Better keep it simple and collected? PPEMES (talk) 23:41, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:U.S. space program sidebar[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; deleted as T3 by Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 11:05, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Redundant copy of Template:United States space program sidebar. -- Beland (talk) 22:02, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • No need for a discussion, the template was a direct copy of the older template. --Gonnym (talk) 07:55, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
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 Province TR[edit]

Replace and delete

Province-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.

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". TerraCyprus (talk) 16:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Faryl Smith[edit]

Not enough links to warrant a navbox. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 13:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:09, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep. No reason based on a policy or guideline presented. This did at one time have other links, but they were removed. One of them was removed by Woodensuperman without comment, which is exceedingly bad form generally, but especially as (s)he then went immediately on to nominate this for deletion. Whether this is relevant or not I don't know, but: This navbox links together the articles contained in a featured topic, which is something favoured by the featured topic criteria. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:29, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Per WP:NAVBOX, this is unnecessary, as the articles are already well linked, and you can already navigate between the two albums by the infoboxes on the articles. There is no place for an album in a navbox on which she made a guest appearance on one song, which is why that was removed. --woodensuperman 08:12, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Buffyverse[edit]

Just a collection of all the other navboxes. There is no article where it would be appropriate to place every single one of these navboxes on per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, so this should never be used. --woodensuperman 10:06, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Delete - it's also placed on the top of talk pages for some reason. Never seen a navbox placed like that. --Gonnym (talk) 07:57, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Gauri Khan[edit]

Not primary creator per WP:FILMNAV --woodensuperman 10:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:C. V. Kumar[edit]

Not primary creator per WP:FILMNAV --woodensuperman 10:00, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Dinesh Vijan[edit]

Only primary creator of one film in the list. See WP:FILMNAV. --woodensuperman 09:59, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Capitals of provinces of Thailand[edit]

There is no such thing as the concept of a province "capital" in Thailand. Originally, this listed the towns/cities the provinces were named after (and which served as the seat of the provincial offices), but as the offices of some provinces have moved location, this has morphed into an WP:OR listing of municipalities in which the offices are located, labelling them as "capitals" where no reliable source does. It's absurd to say Ban Tom is the capital of Phayao Province and Bang Rin of Ranong. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of capitals in Thailand. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:46, 14 May 2019 (UTC) Paul_012 (talk) 05:46, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep (I've copied and pasted this from the List of Capitals in Thailand AfD) for now, at least procedurally. For instance, searching "Phetchaburi" "capital" brings up a number of sources which cite it as a provincial capital. For instance, [2] lists several regional cities as capitals. The infobox for each province lists a capital as well. If we take the nom at face value, there's going to be a fair bit of cleanup required, but considering there's evidence of provincial "capital"s existing in English, I think this list is valid until otherwise shown. SportingFlyer T·C 06:02, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
    • I haven't researched this yet but just a comment on your last statement. There is no such thing as evidence of provincial "capital"s existing in English - either Thailand has provincial capitals or doesn't. --Gonnym (talk) 09:21, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • The AfD has been closed as redirect to Provinces of Thailand (which I've adjusted to use "Namesake town/city" instead of "capital" to avoid confusion). User:SportingFlyer, does this affect your !vote? --Paul_012 (talk) 22:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:DART RR infobox header[edit]

There's a couple issues with this template. For one, orange/yellow text on a white background is hard to read (officially fails WCAG 2.0 AA contrast, but even as a sighted person it's indistinct). Beyond that, the presentation bears no resemblance to actual Dallas Area Rapid Transit station signage. Per the Design Criteria Manual (scroll down to Appendix E, page 307 or so) the station font is some variation of ITC Avant Garde. You can see it in File:DART Parker Road Station 2009-11-25.jpg; black text on a silver-gray background. The default text in {{Infobox station}} is a good deal closer to that presentation than this template. If there's a need for custom styling it can be achieved through the existing {{DART style}}. Mackensen (talk) 02:06, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Province Spain[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. And replace with {{Infobox settlement}} Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Replace and delete

Province-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.

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".

Regions, municipalities, parishes, towns, villages etc. already transclude {{Infobox settlement}} directly.

Visualisation of Spain place infobox usage
Infobox usage on articles about places in Spain

77.183.15.167 (talk) 00:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Replace and delete per nom. Simplify editing and maintenance. TerraCyprus (talk) 16:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace and delete per nom.--Darwinek (talk) 22:22, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
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).


Old discussions[edit]

May 13

Template:Infobox Austrian Landesstraße

de:Vorlage:Infobox Austrian Landesstraße (or de:vorlage:Infobox Landesstraße Österreich) no longer exists, so this is no longer needed for translation functions. Imzadi 1979  13:23, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep. Not quite true. All that's happened is that they've split the template into two: one for B roads and one for L roads. If we delete this, we'll lose the code needed to shim both of those. Also please note there is a separate move discussion for this template. My sense is that we should move this in line with that move proposal and tweak the code so it deals at least with the B roads and, ideally, the L roads as well, to avoid having two shims. Bermicourt (talk) 15:41, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
    • Could you point to the de pages please? I couldn't find them. --Gonnym (talk) 17:42, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
      • Sorry, yes. There are two templates, but not with the names I mentioned above. For major roads (motorways, dual carriageways, state highways) there is de:Vorlage:Infobox hochrangige Straße and for urban roads there is de:Vorlage:Infobox Straße. These are the equivalent of Template:Infobox road. The two templates I referred to above for B and L roads are for a different purpose. Bermicourt (talk) 21:11, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
  • delete since the German version was deleted. if someone wants to create "subst only" {{Infobox hochrangige Straße}} / {{Infobox Straße}} that would be more useful for translating. Frietjes (talk) 20:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

May 10

Template:Revised Minden, Louisiana Mayors

Same reason as the Pineville navbox: most of the articles listed have been deleted at AFD. FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 01:39, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

  • delete if the articles are deleted, and keep if the articles are kept. Frietjes (talk) 22:54, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete most corresponding articles have been deleted. Best, GPL93 (