Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 March 4

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Log
< March 3 March 5 >

March 4

Template:10,000 receiving yards club

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) 15:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NFL related Navbox. Replicates content at

WP:NAVBOX) and they're not part of some "club". Nigej (talk) 15:45, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep It's considered an important achievement for players in the NFL. We have similar template such as Template:NFL 2000 Yard Rushers. Not much harm with this one and it's not arbitrary or made up by the creator. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:16, 6 March 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:Laser Types

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. Primefac (talk) 07:48, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is only directly used in a half dozen navboxes, which really don't need a specific template to contain a half dozen links. Subst and delete is the recommendation here. Izno (talk) 19:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete without subst. Template:Lasers should handle laser types. Gonnym (talk) 06:58, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me. Izno (talk) 08:10, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is used in various laser navbox templates, such as Template:Gas lasers. Blindly deleting without subst is not an option. I reverted the ill-advised change in formatting, which affected all the pages on which it is included. I think this proposal needs more thought, and perhaps a review of all the laser templates. I'm no fan of navboxes, but using a template to keep common text the same across a set of navboxes is a sensible use of the template feature. --Srleffler (talk) 03:36, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know that it is used in various laser navbox templates, I firmly oppose that design which is why I said "Delete without subst". Template:Lasers is the correct place for those links. Gonnym (talk) 07:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion, for the reason I explained above. --Srleffler (talk) 03:36, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 10:42, 4 March 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:&numero

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. Primefac (talk) 07:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:NUMERO clearly states do not use the symbol №. Gonnym (talk) 09:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

@Nigej: Like {{xt}}? Not allowed in project space. Also there are even limited exceptions to the MOS rule. When you are directly quoting, for example, or you're quoting a text in Russian, which uses this symbol regularly, it is even on their keyboard. Replacing with "No." in a Cyrillic text alleged to have come from the Soviet Union would make no sense. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 14:20, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep—a template does not need to follow the MOS. Plenty of our templates are made for talk pages and project pages. This is a useful template and you can track its inclusions and remove them where inappropriate. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 14:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you point to where templates are excluded from following the MoS? Gonnym (talk) 09:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    talk) 19:35, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - why not just add a namespace check that displays a warning if used in an article, like {{
    MOS:ACCESS. I don't see why it should be deleted just for MOS reasons, though I guess an argument that it's also unnecessary for discussions could be made. eviolite (talk) 03:43, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • comment, adding namespace restriction like {{
    tq}} seems like a reasonable compromise, but deleting it due to low usage seems reasonable as well. Frietjes (talk) 18:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To get further thoughts on the namespace restriction idea.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 10:36, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This template has existed for almost two years, and it has almost no transclusions (I count three actual usages). Each of those transclusions would be better served by writing "No." as recommended by MOS. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:20, 4 March 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/RB-BY left/33

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) 00:44, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Rail templates, presumably orphaned by updating articles to Module:Adjacent stations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:06, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 16:36, 6 March 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:FCBL Labelled 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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:33, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and out-of-date map of the teams in the Futures Collegiate Baseball League, now covered by a different map there. Nigej (talk) 06:30, 4 March 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:Track gauge/documentation notes

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) 15:52, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused documentation notes which also exist in a very similar form at {{Track gauge/doc/input options}}. Nigej (talk) 06:52, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: It says: "This page saves the documentation pre May 2014. Data is outdated. The notes are not available any more, but might be useful for research (especially the scaled gauges)". For this, we'd like to hear from
    WP:TRAINS, especially scaled gauges (modeling). I'll add a note there. (I co-created the 2014 replacing {{Track gauge}} template). -DePiep (talk) 07:00, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Put a note at WT:TRAINS#... Tried to be both neutral and specific, HTH. -DePiep (talk) 07:12, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
However, at the moment its impossible for anyone to find it, since it's not linked from anywhere. Another option is to move it to your user space. Nigej (talk) 08:38, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Nigej: fine with me, if it doesn't disrupt this process. -DePiep (talk) 08:44, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No it won't. Nigej (talk) 08:47, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
1. Page moved to WP:TRAINS/2014 Track gauge documentation notes (abandoned) for future use by the WikiProject,
2. Template:Track gauge/documentation notes now a redirect,
3. OP issue 'unused template' solved, the redirect can be deleted, speedy AFAIK (also per db-author = me).
Delete this one. -DePiep (talk) 09:10, 4 March 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:Utility scale PV prices by country

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! 05:35, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused table covered at Photovoltaic system#System cost 2013. Nigej (talk) 06:56, 4 March 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:2018 Asian Games Iran men's basketball team roster

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! 05:36, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused roster, covered in less (but probably sufficient) detail at Basketball at the 2018 Asian Games – Men#Squads. Nigej (talk) 07:35, 4 March 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:Coronavirus data/Patients characteristics2

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 per request. Primefac (talk) 07:39, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused variant of {{

Coronavirus data/Patients characteristics}}. Was intended to be a more detailed version but seems like it was never completed and used. See Talk:Coronavirus disease/v2.0. Nigej (talk) 12:06, 4 March 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:BBCmemberwelcome

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 14:24, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome banner with a hard-wired username who hasn't made an edit for 12 years. {{BBCmemberwelcome2}} perhaps is still used and could be usefully renamed to this name (without the 2). Nigej (talk) 14:47, 4 March 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:Introduction to genetics glossary/term

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 14:24, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Was used by {{Introduction to genetics glossary}} but not since it was turned into a sidebar in 2018. Nigej (talk) 15:28, 4 March 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:Progress meter/request

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, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blank template for a "Requested changes and features" section at {{Progress meter/doc}}, which I have removed since it sent the message to an inactive editor. {{Progress meter}} itself has very limited usage. Nigej (talk) 15:41, 4 March 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:PSL PORTAL INVITE

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, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation template that I suspect was used as the now-deleted Portal:Pakistan Super League. Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan Super League/Invitation covers current usage. Nigej (talk) 16:06, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete wow, so as well as making a breakaway WikiProject, the PSL fandom also once tried to make their own portal? This template is not needed, as per nom, there's a correct invitation for their WP. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:03, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per nom and Joseph2302s comments. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:03, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:04, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per nom. Fade258 (talk) 08:53, 10 March 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:Penn Central Valpo

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, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused route-map covered by {{Amtrak Calumet}} which has notes related to 1970s closures. Nigej (talk) 16:16, 4 March 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:ReopenSPI

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, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. An abandoned experiment. It was

discussed and implemented briefly in 2011, then removed shortly thereafter. It is not currently used. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:06, 4 March 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:Request edit/preload

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 14:26, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This preload template was created in 2014 with the edit summary "will be used", but I am unable to find a record of its usage in the parent template, which appears to work fine without it. If I am wrong and this template is used somewhere, let me know, and I will document it properly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:09, 4 March 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:Road browse

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 14:26, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, incoming links, or documentation. The only edit was creation in 2016. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:14, 4 March 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/BE-IC right/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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Seven unrelated S-line rail templates, presumably orphaned by updating the relevant articles to use Module:Adjacent stations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:22, 4 March 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:SGP Results/hollow

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! 20:43, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions or documentation. No parent template. This appears to be an experiment by an editor (Radzinski) who has not edited in six years. There is a link to it from one of that editor's user pages. Delete or userfy. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:26, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Speedway related. Unlikely to be useful in the future. Nigej (talk) 17:37, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:04, 6 March 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:SGP Results4/D

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! 20:43, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, incoming links, or documentation. Subpage created in mid-2020 with no current usage. Other subpages are used in articles; it appears that this one may not be needed. Without documentation, there is no way to know. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:31, 4 March 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:Socksuspectnotice

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! 20:44, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template is no longer used by

talk) 18:28, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

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

Template:Infobox museum/University of Cambridge Museums

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! 20:44, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused duplicate of {{Infobox museum/University of Cambridge Museums network}}. Nigej (talk) 19:12, 4 March 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:Mexican secretariats

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! 20:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused infobox-style template from 2008 relating to Mexican government departments. Other infoboxes are used eg {{Infobox government agency}}. Nigej (talk) 19:29, 4 March 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:Modi ministry

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! 20:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused content that already exists at First Modi ministry#Cabinet ministers. Nigej (talk) 19:35, 4 March 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:Port Wakefield railway line

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! 20:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused route-map covered by {{Port Wakefield–Moonta railway line}}. Nigej (talk) 20:47, 4 March 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_March_4&oldid=1076658946"