Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 15

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< February 14 February 16 >

February 15

Template:Attitude Era series

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 04:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sidebar for the Attitude Era, part of the History of WWE. Doesn't seem much of a "series", content more suitable for a navbox which we already have {{WWE}}. Nigej (talk) 16:01, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Was unused as somebody removed them from articles quietly. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 19:41, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Was the one who removed it, because it was added by one person without discussion and is not a good navbox, especially the use of a sidebar for such a short and narrow topic list. Sidebars are for major top-level stuff. Doesn't add anything to be articles. delete oknazevad (talk) 02:37, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And you, one person, removed it... without discussion? Hmm. "Sidebars are for major top-level stuff" - citation needed. "Doesn't add anything to be articles" - it adds a sidebar to the article to navigate to associated articles within the topic with ease. There are additional articles to be created which would pass GNG that would also be included. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 10:24, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Editor A added something, Editor B removed it. That is the cycle of
WP:BRD. They don't need a discussion in order to remove it, as the short time it was on the article is not enough to establish a consensus for it. Gonnym (talk) 11:20, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Editor B removed every instance of it from the articles without even informing Editor A. Very bad form that. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 19:18, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Editor B is allowed to do that. The fault lies with Editor A who restored his changes.
WP:BRD says "Don't restore your changes ..." Nigej (talk) 19:27, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
The seventh, eighth, and ninth words of that policy are "an optional method". So, I'm allowed to do that. 👍 All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 19:08, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: It's now used on articiles, and i think we should keep it as its useful for Attiude Era articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TzarN64 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Nothing directly related to the Attitude Era exists other than its mainspace. These are all about WWF, now WWE events, and directly related to the WWF/WWE. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:16, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Literally all the pages linked are things which occurred during the "Attitude Era". Has one been included which doesn't? Please tell me which one. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 07:46, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That's true, but the question is whether they're all part of a "series" of articles. To me this is more a parent article and a number of child articles, when a navbox is often preferred. Nigej (talk) 09:36, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert to bottom navbox if wanted. There is no reason for it clutter to the top of the page, and on some pages it's used as the second infobox. Gonnym (talk) 09:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The actual Attitude Era article itself sucks badly and doesn't even define the time period. I've been calling attention to it for years now, but no one ever seems to care. The main article should be vastly improved before wasting time with a "template." 130.45.24.168 (talk) 08:00, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:43, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This discussion is proving my general distaste for templates being added to articles following beign TfDed as unused right; the "organic" status quo was that it was not in use, and no strong reason to deviate from that status quo has been provided, as the sole keep !vote is a near-textbook example of several arguments to avoid. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, sidebars are suboptimal for this type of navigation because the crowd other right-floating content like images and infoboxes. Frietjes (talk) 21:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:ETEN

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:02, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template not used anywhere. Doesn't have any parameters. Existence of this template can easily be avoided by directly using the template on which this one is based: the {{editnotice}}-template. – NJD-DE (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Related: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Entertainment theater. Same creator, appears to not understand what this web site is about. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Per the MFD discussion I'm fairly sure that this is supposed to be an editnotice for the entertainment theatre. This should have been left until that discussion concluded, if that page is deleted this can be G8'd, if kept then this should be kept. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 02:28, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't notice it's related to the other page they created. I had just gone through the user's creation logs, and noticed this template not being used anywhere. If you prefer then I don't mind you speedy procedurally closing this to await the outcome of the MFD. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:21, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough, my comment wasn't intended as a criticism of your nomination, it was more intended as a note on how this should be handled, I think I worded it in slightly the wrong tone. Waiting for the MFD to conclude sounds like the best idea since the fate of this page is tied to the fate of the Entertainment theatre. I expect this is moot discussion really since it's snowing quite heavily at MFD. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 19:02, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unused and redundant. Stifle (talk) 10:58, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Entertainment theater concludes. Perhaps it can be bundled into the MfD? -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 20:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Creator has now been indefinitely blocked. Stifle (talk) 11:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Stink bomb

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) 14:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

image

BLORNK! And also this isn’t the template! This is a meta-joke on a bad joke

You've been

BLORNKNOMINATED FOR BLORNKDELETION

you’ve been for doing something REALLY SILLY blornk lololol (not) you’ve been for doing something REALLY SILLY blornk lololol (not)

The trouting thing was always stupid but now we’re just getting into Reductio ad absurdum. Dronebogus (talk) 01:56, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – Below is the actual Stink bomb template. The image and text above are not associated with it. It comes across as misleading to post in the manner above, because casual readers may incorrectly assume that the above is the Stink bomb template, when it is not. North America1000 05:21, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The actual template
Whack!

Pee-ew, you've been stink bombed!

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

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

Template:R from alternative scientific name/plant

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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:36, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused since Template:R from alternative scientific name was modified to use a module here. Gonnym (talk) 07:00, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:R from monotypic taxon/aux

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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused since Template:R from monotypic taxon was modified to use a module here. Gonnym (talk) 07:02, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:R to monotypic taxon/aux

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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused since Template:R to monotypic taxon was modified to use a module here. Gonnym (talk) 07:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • All three above can be deleted given that they are unused now. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:38, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Nigej (talk) 05:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:ISRCOTW

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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:38, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused banner related to the Israel Collaboration of the Week. Nigej (talk) 07:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Dead idea. Gonnym (talk) 07:15, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Add also Template:ISRCOTW article. Gonnym (talk) 07:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both as Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel/COTW is marked as historical. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:R to subpage/doc support

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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An unused duplicate of Template:R to subpage/doc. Gonnym (talk) 07:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Project portals

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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:40, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused portal related template. Gonnym (talk) 07:08, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Box portal skeleton/doc/box-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 delete. Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and unlinked sub-page. While this is listed as a sub-page of the /docs it really isn't documentation at all. Template:Box portal skeleton#Usage has an example. Gonnym (talk) 07:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Ecology Portal New Intro

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. Speedy deleted per

WP:G7: the only substantial content of the page was added by its author, that being me. Outdated template that isn't needed anymore. North America1000 01:02, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Unused decade old "new" portal template. Since its creator is active in that portal, likely also out of date. Gonnym (talk) 07:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:FloridaCOTM article

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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Relates to Florida collaboration of the month Nigej (talk) 07:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • I literally have no recollection of creating this fifteen years ago, nor any idea what purpose it served. BD2412 T 07:42, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and creator. Gonnym (talk) 08:12, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Footer Davis Cup Champions Tennis Team Men

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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused navbox. List of Davis Cup champions winning teams. Seems unfinished since it only goes to 1959. Difficult to imagine how such a navbox could be useful, and as it's basically article content. Nigej (talk) 07:28, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Former Treehouse original programming

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 speedy delete. CSD G7. Liz Read! Talk! 20:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused duplicate of {{Former Treehouse TV original series}} Nigej (talk) 07:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Former Cartoon Network original series

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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused duplicate of {{Former Cartoon Network original programming}} Nigej (talk) 07:52, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Military Vehicle of France

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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused from 2008. Some in this series have been repurposed as navboxes eg {{French Army Vehicle}}. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft/Archive 19#French nav boxes where they discussed. Nigej (talk) 08:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:FrenchArmyTree

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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused from 2008 and seems to have been replaced with File:Armée du Nord.png, File:Armée des côtes de la Rochelle.png etc Nigej (talk) 08:08, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Handball kit home and away

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. Speedy deleted per

WP:G7: the only substantial content of the page was added by its author, that being me. Outdated template that isn't needed anymore. 🤾‍♂️ Malo95 (talk
)

Unused wrapper for {{Handball kit}}. {{Infobox handball club}} uses "Handball kit" directly. Nigej (talk) 08:18, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I'm nominated it as speedy delete as author of the template. I made a mistake to create this template 🤾‍♂️ Malo95 (talk) 13:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Hebrew calendar tomorrow in time zone

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 10:57, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. {{Hebrew calendar today in time zone}} is used. Nigej (talk) 08:21, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Henderson family tree

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 10:57, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Family tree for someone we don't have an article for. More for personal interest I suspect. Nigej (talk) 08:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Honolulu County, Hawaii topics

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:Honolulu County, Hawaii. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:09, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging

Template:Honolulu County, Hawaii topics with Template:Honolulu
.
Navbox with no transclusions. {{Honolulu}} seems to be preferred, which contains a link to this navbox. Content could perhaps be added there. Nigej (talk) 08:34, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:26, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose {{Honolulu}} is for the urban city area. There is another Honolulu County template that it should merge to, {{Honolulu County, Hawaii}}. The county is coterminous with the island of Oahu, so there is no reason for the entire island to be covered by the urbanized area of Honolulu template -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:55, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Template:Honolulu County, Hawaii. I would have agreed with the merge, seeing as how the articles themselves already transclude Template:Honolulu even though they aren't linked in it, but the IP makes a good point that there is already another Honolulu County template, which should be the merge target. Gonnym (talk) 09:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:House of Bourbon, 1700-1833 (Philip V-Ferdinand VI Arms)

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 10:57, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and basically a duplicate of {{House of Bourbon (Spain)}} with a different coat of arms. There are other similar ones too, like {{House of Bourbon, 1761-1931 (Charles III-Alfonso XIII Arms)}}, which are used. Doesn't seem a good idea since the templates are gradually changing independently of each other. Nigej (talk) 08:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Members of the Chinese Academy of Engineering

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 11:33, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per discussions like

WP:NAVBOX. The members elected in a particular year have nothing really in common, no more so than any other arbitrary grouping of the members. Articles for one member almost never mention those elected in the same year. We have List of members of the Chinese Academy of Engineering etc and Category:Members of the Chinese Academy of Engineering which are more than adequate. I have excluded the {{Founding members of the Chinese Academy of Engineering}} from 1994 which may be a notable group. Nigej (talk) 09:30, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

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

Template:SCOTUSterms

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 13:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Superseded by {{SCOTUScaselists}} which has a line "By recent term" Nigej (talk) 11:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:SCOTUS term for US volume

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 13:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was removed from {{SCOTUSLinks}} in 2016 and seems to be unused. Nigej (talk) 11:59, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. MZMcBride made that change at Special:Diff/753610899. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Seoul American Football Association

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 13:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and is just a list of universities. There's no content on the Seoul American Football Association. Indeed there's minimal content on American football in South Korea, see Category:American football in South Korea Nigej (talk) 12:07, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Shield volcano location 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 delete. ✗plicit 13:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Was used at Shield volcano and List of shield volcanoes from where it was removed in Jan 2013 with the comment "template is currently broken" Nigej (talk) 12:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:This date in recent years/2006Rev

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 13:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates related to {{This date in recent years}} which produces a table at articles like February 15 (currently covering 2022 back to 2013) Nigej (talk) 12:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Tom DeLay series

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

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2022 February 22. ✗plicit 13:12, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Tone-th

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 14:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused as a result of this Tfd Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 December 9#Template:C-nl. Nigej (talk) 13:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:UAAP roster footer

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 14:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. {{

2016 FEU Tamaraws men's basketball team#Roster. This template was created a number of years later than the other two. Nigej (talk) 14:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

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

Shooting record templates 2

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:20, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a follow-up to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 7#Template:Shooting WR 10RT20 Junior Women Individual and related shooting record templates at which a number of unused and single-use shooting record templates were substituted (where necessary) and deleted. This is a further list of other related unused and single-use shooting record templates for which I would suggest the same outcome. Nigej (talk) 17:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RPM Productions titleholders

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 14:25, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox-style template for listing the winners of the beauty contests run by RPM Productions. As with all this style of template, the 8 winners have nothing in common and the template is intended to be purely decorative. Thankfully this one is unused. Nigej (talk) 18:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:S-line/CFR Intercity right/606

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 14:25, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. New S-line templates created two weeks ago and still unused. Module:Adjacent stations should be used instead, so these templates are not usable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:20, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:S-line/Metrovalencia left/10

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 14:27, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. New S-line templates created three weeks ago and still unused. Module:Adjacent stations should be used instead, so these templates are not usable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:21, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Templates now superseded by module. Gonnym (talk) 07:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:RX2 event report

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) 14:51, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and probably unfinished infobox-style template. Relates to events like 2017 World RX of Hockenheim, all of which use {{Infobox World RX event report}}. Not obvious why it was created when the other already existed. Nigej (talk) 18:25, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Reproductive Rights Sidebar

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) 14:52, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sidebar from 2011. Perhaps {{Human reproductive health}} does the job. Nigej (talk) 18:34, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Editnotices/Page/Golden Raspberry Awards

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) 14:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The page disputes that prompted this template's creation at this point seem to have been resolved over a decade ago. While there is nothing inherently wrong with reminders to avoid OR, as far as I can tell there is nothing particular about recent edits to this page that justify a special and unique edit notice. Yaksar (let's chat) 18:35, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • As I've noticed the creator has since been blocked, I will be more blunt and less polite -- this template was created by a former and now blocked admin in order to scare other users from making legitimate changes that they disagreed with. The most egregious part of the template was later removed, but we are left with this unnecessary remaining one.--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:46, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There are way too many of these and this is a typical example, simply repeating policy/guidelines. If it's so important it should be on every page. Nigej (talk) 19:22, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Research Labs of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research

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 14:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Navboxes related to the Indian Council of Agricultural Research. The first is unused and mentions two labs. The second exists at one of those but is empty. Both from the same user. Nigej (talk) 18:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Hamid Al Rifaie family tree

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 14:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Unused family tree template created in 2010. It has only one blue-linked person, whose article does not appear to need a family tree. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No obvious reason this man needs a family-tree more than anyone else. Lots of non-notable people mentioned. Nigej (talk) 19:26, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Template:Mountain West Conference 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) 00:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions or documentation. These appear to have been replaced by Module:College color. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:57, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Land Rover North American timeline

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused timeline for Land Rover North America. No article on that topic and it's probably too similar to {{Land Rover vehicles}} to be useful. No updated since it was created. Nigej (talk) 19:48, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Least Intense Pacific typhoon 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. ✗plicit 23:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. We have {{Top 10 Most Intense Pacific typhoon season}} but perhaps the least intense seasons are not of interest. Nigej (talk) 19:52, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:List of defunct airlines/countries

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An experiment with a different style to {{List of defunct airlines}} but the other seems to be preferred. Nigej (talk) 19:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Deadliest Atlantic hurricane 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. ✗plicit 23:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. We have {{Deadliest Atlantic hurricanes}} which covers a longer period. Nigej (talk) 20:17, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's
talk page or in a deletion review
).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022_February_15&oldid=1073709811"