Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 January 6

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

January 6

Template:Display-flex

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 12:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Little-used templates to generate CSS flex code with browser prefixes. To the best of my knowledge, it is no longer necessary [1] to use browser prefixes with flexbox, and hasn't been for some time. User:GKFXtalk 20:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki currently supports the latest version of Firefox with prefixed properties (27), but that browser doesn't exist meaningfully in our viewership. Delete. Izno (talk) 22:52, 6 January 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:Current Date Nbsp

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 23:41, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template, makes more sense to format text with nowrap as needed rather than having a nowrap variant of a template. User:GKFXtalk 20:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. As with many of these clever templates, users are generally unaware of them and should they need this functionality they would use an obvious alternative, in this case the nowrap template. Nigej (talk) 20:41, 6 January 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:Bg-cyan

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 23:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates to output the long-deprecated bgcolor attribute. If specific colours are needed, then generally CSS should be used directly instead. User:GKFXtalk 20:18, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 08:26, 7 January 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:Repage

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 23:41, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template relating to a failed proposal: Wikipedia:Respell pages. User:GKFXtalk 20:09, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Been lying about for nearly 10 years, having ceased to have any useful purpose. Nigej (talk) 20:45, 6 January 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:Data European Union

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, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates; seems like Wikidata superseded this. User:GKFXtalk 19:56, 6 January 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:VE-notice

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, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t see why you would want to warn editors about bugs in Visual Editor (it’s not their fault, and I wouldn’t expect someone to stop using VE because it has one bug). Hopefully VE has become less buggy since 2014 when this was last edited in any case - it is no longer new software. User:GKFXtalk 19:50, 6 January 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:Unix time

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, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, undocumented wrapper of {{#time:U}} i.e. Unix time. The parser function is usable without a wrapper. User:GKFXtalk 19:39, 6 January 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:IstZahl

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 23:50, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused with no major edits since creation in January 2021. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:12, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment this appears to have been copied from German Wikipedia de:Vorlage:IstZahl , which has documentation in German -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:34, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commnet if kept, it should be renamed into an English-language pagename, instead of being in German -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:42, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unused. We shouldn't have copies of German templates lying around. Nigej (talk) 13:45, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert to redirect. This is the German equivalent of {{Isnumeric}}; if we convert it to a redirect it will automatically sweep up any {{IstZahl}} templates that come across in translation. Even better if it can be auto-substituted. That really speeds up the translate/import process. Bermicourt (talk) 22:16, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It looks too different from isnumeric for a redirect to be worthwhile; I think it could cause more trouble than it solves. User:GKFXtalk 21:41, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:26, 6 January 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:2020 Summer Paralympics wheelchair rugby game A1 and sibling templates

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 23:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. These small templates, which contain article content, already exist as named sections in Wheelchair rugby at the 2020 Summer Paralympics, so if they are truly needed in new articles that do not yet exist, they can be transcluded as sections from that article, as is done at Great Britain at the 2020 Summer Paralympics. Please note the previous TFD discussion in August 2021, which was closed as keep for various reasons. Since then, the templates have remained untranscluded. It appears that consensus has developed in favor of having this article content in the articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:46, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I've added a couple that were tagged but missing from the above list. Nigej (talk) 17:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. Should never have been created in the first place. The truth is that the existence of such templates is a sure sign that content is being added in the wrong places. Great Britain at the 2020 Summer Paralympics doesn't need to have all the detailed results. There's a link there to Wheelchair rugby at the 2020 Summer Paralympics which has all the details. We're just creating bloated articles with excessive detail. Nigej (talk) 18:07, 6 January 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:Current CF aircraft

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 23:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, no incoming links. Superseded by {{Canadian Forces aircraft}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:31, 6 January 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:ColtsInvite

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 23:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Substed four times in 2008 and then apparently abandoned. Has been the subject of many maintenance edits over the years since then. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete
    WP:COLTS is inactive, one of many micro-projects in the same state. As such it's highly unlikely to be needed again. If kept it ought to be moved to something like {{WikiProject Indianapolis Colts/Invite}}. Nigej (talk) 17:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Rename to WP:WikiProject Indianapolis Colts/Template:Invite as this doesn't need to sit in templatespace, it can just be a project subpage. They can use it if the wikiproject is revivified. Just update the instructions on the wikiproject's front page -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. No need to rename as the chance of the project being revived is negligible. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:16, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • The project is declared inactive, not defunct. And the subject of the project is the Indianapolis Colts, an NFL team. Considering the popularity of American football in general and the NFL in particular, it does not seem it would be a "negligible" chance of revival. If they win a Superbowl, or AFC championship, that could revive interest. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 17:56, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • There's clearly a trend for these micro-projects to die out. Personally I can't see that reversing.
        WP:NFL is the appropriate level for a project. Nigej (talk) 17:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
        ]
Delete, don't rename. We don't need to keep things around just in case. Gonnym (talk) 23:45, 13 January 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:Cn probably

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 23:46, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, no incoming links, no documentation, no categories. Only edit was creation. I see no reason that this template is needed; {{citation needed}} has a |reason= parameter. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Either a citation is needed or not and if you're not sure then its probably best not to get involved. Nigej (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. User:GKFXtalk 18:44, 7 January 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:Cite ChemRxiv

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 23:46, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Abandoned experiment from 2019 that was created and then never tested by its creator. See this discussion and this discussion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:17, 6 January 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:Chunichi Dragons 2021 Draft Picks

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 23:47, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fails

WP:NAVBOX criteria. No main article, no links to articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:14, 6 January 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:China census population

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Appears to have been replaced by more comprehensive tables at Demographics of China. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Unused infobox-style template, needs deleting. Nigej (talk) 16:34, 6 January 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:Chadic languages

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 January 13. ✗plicit 23:48, 13 January 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:Caucasian Albanian churches and monastries in Azerbaijan

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Duplicate of {{Caucasian Albanian churches and monasteries in Azerbaijan}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Duplicate template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:27, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete per
    WP:G6 "Deleting pages unambiguously created in error" A misspelling of monasteries which the creator noticed and then created the other a few minutes later. Nigej (talk) 16:30, 6 January 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:FloatingImage

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 23:53, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template could potentially create problematic styling that interferes with the usability of the site. As much as I see a template like this clever, the unfortunate reality is that, having made my fair share of questionable templates myself almost six years ago, this template may push images into parts of the screen where important links (like the left navigation and the profile links as well as the view/edit/talk/history links) are commonly found, obscuring the text and thus violating

MOS:ACCESSIBILITY. Since there is also no prospective use for this template in mainspace I am nominating this page for deletion. Aasim (talk) 15:22, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete. Fixed-position images (rather than floating images as the template name suggests) are highly likely to interfere with the interface and obscure content. Even if they look fine on one skin or on desktop they may obscure something on a different skin or mobile. User:GKFXtalk 19:45, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. On a personal level, I find it very intrusive that an editor hijacks my display for very questionable aesthetics. Should we start requesting ad-blocker apps work here now? Gonnym (talk) 09:09, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reply @Gonnym: Ive seen my userpage on mobile skin, and it does not affect me. Plus, this argument could also be used for images that are overlayed over links (but aren't fixed position), which already exist. WeaponizingArchitecture | talk to me 19:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Two wrongs in this case, do not make a right, just two wrongs. Gonnym (talk) 00:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by that. Please elaborate. WeaponizingArchitecture | talk to me 06:15, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I really want to give helpful pointers to deletion nominations, but "other stuff exists" is not, on its own, a valid reason for keeping or deleting. You may wish to take a look at Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions to see why some XfD arguments have logical fallacies. If you have concerns about other pages, feel free to open a new XfD, but do not do so to illustrate a point. In other words, don't go about finding templates that also make items float or fix on the page to make a point about this template or other related templates. Aasim (talk) 20:01, 8 January 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:Portal bar/item

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 23:49, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above are unused portal-related templates. Gonnym (talk) 14:10, 6 January 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:Malaysian party colour

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) 05:59, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The parent template is unused but Template:Malaysian party colour/colour and Template:Malaysian party colour/name are. Usages of those should be converted to use Module:Political party directly or one of its templates, as currently we are maintaining two parallel lists which will go out sync and will cause issues. Gonnym (talk) 13:09, 6 January 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:L1-Vitality

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 11:55, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused in mainspace and only used in the creator's sandbox which they've said they haven't touched in years. Gonnym (talk) 10:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as clutter. --Sankari (talk) 12:03, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just make sure to subst them before deletion. The templates might no longer be needed, but the sandboxes are still useful.
    b} 12:50, 6 January 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:Taxobox/error

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 11:53, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Taxobox templates. After confirming with Peter coxhead these seem safe to delete. Gonnym (talk) 10:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little unsure about {{Taxobox/error}} – it's possible there are some error circumstances that would trigger this template – but the others can be deleted. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:03, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've checked in all sub-pages of Template:Taxobox and none called it. Are there any templates that could call it? Gonnym (talk) 17:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I’m getting no results by search, I think it’s fine unless there’s an obfuscated call to it somewhere: [2]. User:GKFXtalk 20:05, 6 January 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:Hazard O Oxidizing

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 11:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Hazmat card other than in a talk page. Gonnym (talk) 09:55, 6 January 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:Hazmat

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 11:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Hazmat templates. Gonnym (talk) 09:54, 6 January 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:Hazchem C

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 11:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused Hazmat icon templates (except in a talk page or two). Gonnym (talk) 09:52, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Relates, it seems, to an old EU system: see Directive 67/548/EEC. The icons will still be there but these wrappers are not required. Nigej (talk) 11:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as clutter. --Sankari (talk) 12:05, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, unused. (eg, last December in {{Chembox}} all |EUclass= transclusions were replaced by modern GHS label signs). -DePiep (talk) 18:45, 11 January 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:Wikipedia general information

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 11:32, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused internal navigation template User:GKFXtalk 08:36, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Seems we can do without it. Nigej (talk) 14:20, 6 January 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:NASCAR Triple Threats

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 11:51, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Corresponding

WP:NAVBOX
#4: "There should be a Wikipedia article on the subject of the template." Also fails #2: "The subject of the template should be mentioned in every article": only two of the 36 articles do. Arguably fails #5, too: "If not for the navigation template, an editor would be inclined to link many of these articles in the See also sections of the articles." While I haven't checked in-depth, #3 "The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent" does not seem plausible either, certainly not in the context of the template's subject. Paradoctor (talk) 06:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Fails everything about a navbox. See eg Elliott Sadler which has so much clutter at the end that no one would possibly use this for navigation. Basically just dull stats anyway. Nigej (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator MWright96 (talk) 09:56, 8 January 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:BlackBerry World

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 11:42, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The BlackBerry device is no more, and the URL this template generates is dead. Fortunately, this template has only 3 mainspace trasclusions. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:09, 6 January 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:POTY-GetYear

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 03:20, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, no incoming links, no documentation, no categories. Only edit was creation in 2013. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 10:17, 6 January 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:PNR station

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 03:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, no incoming links. Articles do not appear to use this naming standard, as seen at List of Philippine National Railways stations, so the template seems unlikely to link to the right article unless someone created many unnecessary redirects. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 10:17, 6 January 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:PMP party

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 03:16, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. According to México Posible, the only possible use of this template would be in 2003 Mexican legislative election, but that page does not use icons. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:16, 6 January 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:PLA-Army

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 03:13, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Redundant with {{army|China}}, as documented at the standard flag country template, {{Country data China}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Delete before someone uses it. Nigej (talk) 14:29, 6 January 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:PHLregionabbr

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 03:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, no documentation, no incoming links. Not found in any current wikitext on any page. Content is a straightforward switch statement that was either never used or has been replaced in the template that was using it. Created in 2017. No longer useful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:09, 6 January 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:PHL-E

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 03:02, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, no incoming links, no documentation, no categories. Only edits were creation in 2017. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:00, 6 January 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:UNTV Cup roster 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. ✗plicit 03:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. The roster header template uses documentation from a different template. The player template has no documentation and appears to be a copy of some other basketball template. This looks like an abandoned experiment from 2019. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 10:21, 6 January 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:Estonian champions

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. ✗plicit 03:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Most or all of these links go to sections of articles. This navbox does not really fit the criteria for navboxes; it would probably work better as a category, a list article, or a section of an article about sports in Estonia. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unused. Pretty random selection of events/sports. I don't think multi-sport templates like this are generally much use for navigation. Nigej (talk) 11:37, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment Unused, yes. Can you move it to my user namespace though? Pelmeen10 (talk) 15:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Userfy at creator's request. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:57, 9 January 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:Essaycatscore

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 02:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. This apparently defunct template looks like it was once used at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia essays/Assessment/Links, but a bot has taken over updating that page (see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AntiCompositeBot 2) and does not need this template anymore. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:52, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Very specific and seemingly not used any more. Nigej (talk) 14:25, 6 January 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:Cup Finalist

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 02:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not used, not needed. This, that and the other (talk) 02:51, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. No transclusions, no documentation, no categories. I have added the related {{Cup Winner}} to this nomination, with the same rationale. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:56, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Per above. Not required. Nigej (talk) 11:34, 6 January 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:ENB-notice

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 02:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template appears to have been substed three times back in 2012, and appears to have been unused since then. It has no documentation, no transclusions, no incoming links, and no indication that it has been useful to anyone for the last nine years. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:38, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Probably no one knows of its existence so won't get used. Nigej (talk) 11:32, 6 January 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:EZtitle

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 02:37, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, no incoming links, no documentation, no categories. Only edit was creation in 2019. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:35, 6 January 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:Missing articles in category

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 02:37, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We should delete it because the template is now obsolete. Q28 (talk) 02:10, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unused. Meaning is unclear but seems to have been unused for 14 years. Nigej (talk) 07:57, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the URL needs to be updated. When I clicked on it, it was asking for German Wikipedia instead of English Wikipedia; the new URL seems to be https://missingtopics.toolforge.org/?language=en&project=wikipedia&article=&category=&depth=1&wikimode=0&nosingles=1&limitnum=1&doit=Run -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:54, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 02:24, 6 January 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:X-Men (TV 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. ✗plicit 02:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All episodes redirected and "video release" page nominated for deletion. Now fails

WP:NENAN Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:50, 6 January 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:VE-user

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 00:02, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VE is no longer new so this message should not be required again. User:GKFXtalk 00:00, 6 January 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_January_6&oldid=1065768776"