Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 6

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< November 5 November 7 >

November 6

Template:Fake news

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unlikely to happen, overly polemic. Just use {{Unreliable fringe source}} or {{dubious}} and keep political neologisms like "fake news" out of this. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:26, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Explore Birds

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:24, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Emblazonment

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Just make it a table Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:24, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Disclaim

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unclear use Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Deprecated date

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unclear usage Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:21, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Crimson Thorn

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, all content redirects to main page Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:19, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Counter-essay

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and overly specific Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:18, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Cleanup weighted section

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused fork of {{cleanup}} and {{POV}}. Has been around since 2018. Seems too specific Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:17, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Cast of Teen Wolf

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused single-use template. The Teen Wolf articles already have better formatted wikitables with the same info Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:15, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Caracal track listing

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused track listing template. Not needed Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:13, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Nothing here that isn't already linked within {{Disclosure}}. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 23:39, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: track listing templates should not be used if there is already a navbox with the links for all the tracks, and {{Disclosure}} already exists, so this template is redundant. Richard3120 (talk) 00:39, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per nom. Newshunter12 (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:CM Blas Kids

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, possibly hoax templates. One of the two was created by a user with no other edits. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:11, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Broken wikitext

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:13, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Though subst'ed, the text " One of your recent edits broke the page formatting" doesn't turn up any results, suggesting this has never been used. There are better warning templates anyway. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Brexit note

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) 19:11, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused topic-specific version of "update needed" template. Seems too specific for use. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:08, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Ali Rahnema

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2021 November 13. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:10, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:ACEQuestions

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) 19:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template from 2009 with unclear usage Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:31, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Brisbane City FC seasons

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) 19:09, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and only one article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:18, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Now used. The question should be whether the rest of the articles redlinked currently are notable subjects which can be created. If yes, the template should be kept. --SuperJew (talk) 06:49, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Used on one article isn't enough. The minimum needed is five links. This doesn't have it. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:14, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Grand Slam/meta/color

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:08, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused (2 transclusions substituted). Tennis statistics pages use dozens of colors, so abstracting this singular color to a template provides no value. Sod25 (talk) 15:47, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Tennis Tournament Draws

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 14:08, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused (only transclusion substituted), and not how external links are made on tennis tournament articles nowadays. Sod25 (talk) 13:39, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:2010 ATP Challenger Tour Results

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 14:07, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Substituted on the only page it was transcluded (2010 ATP Challenger Tour). No other year's article uses a template. Sod25 (talk) 13:05, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Performance timeline legend

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. But, feel free to create a redirect to Template:Performance key if you feel it is useful. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:05, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Redundant to Template:Performance key Sod25 (talk) 11:49, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Invisible

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) 19:04, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This template is used to only show content in user space. It is currently used in 31 pages. 10 of them are in article space. Those 10 uses are actually very harmful as they hide actual article content. The sandbox uses seem to originate from Template:Article templates/generic article. I don't think having a box telling the editor that the article ends halfway into a page is correct, when the see also sections, ref, bib and everything else is also part of the article. It just seems pointless, just as it would be to place a box at the top stating "article starts here".

Finally Template:User other already does the logic of this template. I propose to delete the template and all current usages, while making sure the article content does not get deleted, only this template around it. Gonnym (talk) 09:27, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Judging from the transclusions of this template (a dozen of which I just fixed or removed), it was either misunderstood, not understood, or misused. Redundant to Template:User other. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:08, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as redundant. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above; usage is either in error or should switch to {{User other}}. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 01:42, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it is not needed any more, the comments show now in a way that they are enough for what the template had been created for.   ManosHacker talk 07:53, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:MyRandomQuote

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 14:06, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not used, and it's not clear what it's used for. Did Q28 make a mess today? 06:01, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Welcomeanon-rand

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 14:06, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to have alternate texts (one user may prefer the -short text over the -default text) and those alternate versions should be considered separately on their merits. But having a template randomly selected is pointless and silly. Did Q28 make a mess today? 05:54, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Welcomeg-rand

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 14:05, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be a remnant of the previous welcome template tfd. --Did Q28 make a mess today? 05:46, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reason: No one uses is the point and although the template document says it's for comparison, almost no one uses it for comparison.--Did Q28 make a mess today? 05:55, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reason: There are plenty of legitimate reasons to have alternate texts (one user may prefer the -short text over the -default text) and those alternate versions should be considered separately on their merits. But having a template randomly selected is pointless and silly.--Did Q28 make a mess today? 05:57, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:01, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom (although I might support deletion of the -short templates as well). * Pppery * it has begun... 01:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per nom. Newshunter12 (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Hsps

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 14:04, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we may need to delete it because it is never used. Did Q28 make a mess today? 05:46, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:LCV

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; deleted as

G7 by Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 13:06, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

I don't know the purpose of this template, it may be a template for testing. Did Q28 make a mess today? 05:43, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    • Hi, creator of the template here. I think it was for inclusion and use in the Covid Ventilator per country article, but the template is not in use as of now. Speedy delete = ok. Yug (talk) 🐲 10:20, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:I'm Breathless tracks

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 14:04, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only one entry is in use, and that entry has been replaced. Did Q28 make a mess today? 05:42, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Cite serial/old

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:25, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No one uses is the point and although the template document says it's for comparison, almost no one uses it for comparison. Did Q28 make a mess today? 05:39, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This and the other {{cite <whatever>/old}} templates listed on this page (could the proposer not have lumped them together into a single nomination?): Yes, they are rarely used but they are the historical wikisource references against which the initial Lua implementation of cs1 was judged and against which the current implementation may be compared. It is not necessary to publish a page with {{cite compare}} using one of these ~/old templates in order to see the comparison so I rarely do unless it is in discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1. Do not delete these templates.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This template has been here before and was not deleted. Between then and now, {{cite compare}} has been modified so that ~/old cs1 templates are not automatically included in its rendering:
Cite DVD notes comparison
Wikitext {{cite DVD notes|title=Title}}
Old Title (Liner notes). 
Live Title (Media notes).
Sandbox Title (Media notes).
Because of that tfd, I added this to all of the {{cite <whatever>/old}} cs1 templates:
The addition of the {{mbox}} was an attempt to forestall future tfds for those templates. Clearly that did not work. Do not delete these templates. Q28, please withdraw these nominations.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. What is the point in comparing a 6 year old templated version to a lua version? I get comparing a live version vs a sandbox version to see new changes, but I fail to see the value of a template like Template:Cite serial/old from 2015... Gonnym (talk) 13:07, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Editors occasionally appear at
WT:CS1
were they not absolutely certain that their claim is correct so therefore, whatever I say is wrong unless I can demonstrate otherwise. Using the ~/old versions to render an example of {{cite <whatever>}} is as close to a definitive demonstration of how the template once rendered as is possible to achieve. Yeah, sure, these editors can:
  1. search the {{cite <whatever>}} history for a pre-lua version of the template
  2. edit that version of the template
  3. find an article that uses {{cite <whatever>}} and put that article's title in the Preview page with this template box
  4. click the adjacent Show preview button and observe the results
For those editors who are technically minded, the above is likely not a problem. For non-technical editors, it can be. It is easier for editors at WT:CS1 to show than it is for them to explain how non-technical editors can see for themselves.
Were the cs1|2 templates not so ubiquitous, I would be inclined to agree with you, but, being able to show rather than to explain how-to-see is better all 'round.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:44, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all Per nom. There is no point keeping a horde of unused comparison templates in the hope that someone someday might actually use them for comparison. They serve no purpose, and so no longer belong on Wikipedia. Newshunter12 (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The comparisons are not theoretical. We regularly though rarely have users show up to
    Help talk:CS1 precisely because of "I swear it did this". --Izno (talk) 01:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Keep per Ttm. --Izno (talk) 01:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Central African Republic Civil War detailed map

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:24, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused maps and very hard to navigate with to know the information the maps display. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:16, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the maps are very useful in the context of territorial control.Alhanuty (talk) 19:19, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even though there already exists maps on the main pages for these conflicts that show the context of territorial control. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:01, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Map are much more needed,the maps on Wikipedia depend on the template maps for information.Alhanuty (talk) 15:25, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What template maps? Most maps are not templates and are not in template format, but rather as standard files. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:28, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep They are used to help make the maps on the actual articles Wowzers122 (talk) 01:01, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is very useful to know who controls smaller places than the big cities, which sometimes is hard to find out.--Andres arg (talk) 22:58, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Template detailed maps are essential in order to understand the evolution of territorial control during conflicts.--HCPUNXKID 20:50, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment None of the keep votes are actually addressing the unused factor and the inability to edit and how these maps can do what the file maps on the articles for these conflicts aren't doing already. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:55, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional comments should address the rationale for deletion and nomination as well as related policy on use (or lack thereof) of templates.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 05:25, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. After a week of discussion and several keeps, none of the maps found a home. Claiming something is useful and it being actual useful are two different things. If a template isn't used in any article, it means the community as a whole has found it to be unwanted. Gonnym (talk) 08:43, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But there are links to them in the articles. Why is not that enough? If the problem is that they are not in any article, anyone can add it on their respective page.--Andres arg (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are they being used within the articles to provide information or some sort of navigation? If they are just linked, then what good does it do if it's not part of the article? No point in having it if's not going to be used on the article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:20, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A template should be transcluded into an article, not hide article content. If the problem is that they are not in any article, anyone can add it on their respective page, then do so if you believe it belongs there. That's a true test to see if the community wants that template on the page. If it gets removed, then you get your answer. Gonnym (talk) 00:44, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep These are extremely useful for determining near real-time data. the War maps Haven't been updated in months and sometimes years while the Telepate is updated quite often so it's great when trying to make a map for people both in and out of the Wikipedia community.--Garmin21 (talk) 20:46, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep for the Yemeni Civil War detailed map, Weak Keep for the others. In my opinion WikiCleanerMan made a big error to include the YCW map along the others. YCW map is being used and updated currently, because of the Houthi advances in Marib Governorate.Mr.User200 (talk) 21:51, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And yet, I don't see any of these maps anywhere on the articles they were created for. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:37, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Map you see when you click on a war article like the ones for Yemen, Somalia, Mali, and Tigray is based on the based off detailed map, in other words, you wouldn't have the map for those articles without the detailed map.--Garmin21 (talk) 04:30, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Alaska fire departments

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was merge to Template:United States fire departments. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:24, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only one, the Wisconsin template, is unused. The rest contain fewer than five links needed for a navbox. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:35, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 05:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. This topic is not something I have additional knowledge so I can't tell if those sea of red links will ever be turned into blue links. But after a week of no participation then I'd say that the best option currently is to merge these all to Template:United States fire departments as each template alone does not have enough links and is pretty much pointless, but merged, offer some value. Gonnym (talk) 08:46, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's unlikely considering the history of the creation of these templates but merging to this new template with sections for each state for the respective fire departments that exist can make navigation easier for this time. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:18, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Years in mixed martial arts

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 14:04, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and only links to categories which is not what navboxes are for. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:42, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 05:21, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Those categories use {{
Navseasoncats with decades below year}} for navigation. Gonnym (talk) 08:52, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Delete per Gonnym * Pppery * it has begun... 01:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Yel-c1

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:23, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

c3 and c5 are unused. C1, 2, 4 have one to two uses and should be substituted where used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:53, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 05:21, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete. Only used in two articles (two years for the same club). Seems this template didn't catch on and I wonder if there is a different template all the other tables use? Gonnym (talk) 08:59, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete per Gonnym. Also not complicated enough to really need a template in the first place. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Youth Olympic venues

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was merge to Template:Youth Olympic venues. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:22, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The first template is unused and contains either red links or non-related links. The four for the specific sports don't have the necessary amount of links to navigate with not counting the years of the events linked in the templates. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:57, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 05:21, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to a new Template:Youth Olympic venues with only blue non-redirect links. Gonnym (talk) 09:01, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge to a new template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:15, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Year nationality novels category header

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 userfy. Izno (talk) 20:25, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:01, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can it be userfyied until it's ready? --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:45, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 05:20, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy to creator's sandbox as after a year and a half it is more abandoned than a WiP. Gonnym (talk) 09:02, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy To BHG's sandbox. I agree with Gonnym that this unused template is essentially abandoned. Newshunter12 (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy until it is ready for use. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:20, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:WikiWidget

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 14:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what this template is for, so delete it. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:54, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Q28 This template was designed to support wikiwidgets (interactive JavaScript widgets) but I never managed to enable them in the English Wikipedia (see my first and second try). You can see them live in the Spanish Wikipedia here or here. I think they are pretty cool, but if no one else cares, please go ahead and delete the template, cheers! Sophivorus (talk) 11:31, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:You may edit this draft

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 14:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't any drafts that use that hint right now, so maybe we can get delete it. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:53, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a bit more: This template is redundant to Template:Draft article which already allows users to help draft articles. This one was created two years after Draft article and has been used around since 2014. Draft article is used more often. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:19, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Ut1

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 14:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be almost useless and probably obsolete. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:49, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Ufy

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 14:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was supposed to be used for user discussion, but it was abandoned because no one maintained it. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:47, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Su/old

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 14:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Never used because no one remembered him. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:46, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Wikisource history/漢書

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 14:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a mistake. It is not used, so I think it should be deleted. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:44, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:MLS color

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and no updates in almost 10 years. BLAIXX 03:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_November_6&oldid=1138372511"