Page move-protected

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText, Topic, or talk page deletion discussions, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
"WP:TD" redirects here. For TemplateData, see Wikipedia:VisualEditor/TemplateData.
Find this page confusing? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!

Closing instructions

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

How to use this page[edit]

What not to propose for discussion here[edit]

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

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

Reasons to delete a template[edit]

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

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

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

Listing a template[edit]

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

I Tag the template.
Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:
  • If the template to be nominated for deletion is protected, make a request for the Tfd tag to be added, by posting on the template's talk page and using the {{editprotected}} template to catch the attention of administrators.
  • For templates designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the Tfd notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template.
  • Do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
    or
    Nominated for merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]].

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of the other template for a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects (look on the top of the template's talk page) that do not use Article alerts, so that they are aware of the discussion.

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

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

Twinkle[edit]

Twinkle is a convenient tool that can perform many of the functions of notification automatically. However, at present, it does not notify the creator of the other template in the case of a merger, so this step has to be performed manually. Twinkle also does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them have automatic alerts. It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.

Discussion[edit]

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

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

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

Contents

Current discussions[edit]

July 29[edit]


July 28[edit]

Template:Boldklubben Frem player[edit]

External link template, created in 2010. Only four transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:26, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:USBOP-Inmate ID[edit]

External link template, created in 2010; only a single transclusion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:23, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Probably could be used a lot more, but I'm not sure that it is quite the correct output for the multiple places it could be used. (like the tables in Federal Medical Center, Carswell)Naraht (talk) 19:41, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Čsfd osoba[edit]

External link template, created in 2013, but with only three transclusions. Not in English. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:03, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Labelled map of tunisia[edit]

This map was created for transclusion in Tunisia, where it was inserted in this revision. The labels were never visible because the x and y values weren't between 0 and 1 as they're supposed to be. So a list of links to Tunisia's governorate articles was replaced by a map with no labels. Further, it caused a mile of blank space to appear at the bottom of the article—noticing that is what led to my discovering that this template was reponsible.

I tried fixing this by sticking a decimal point in front of all the x and y values. The labels all appeared, but there is no rhyme or reason to their location. Unless someone wants to fix this, the template should be deleted, with no harm done since anyone who wants to can remake it in the future. In Tunisia I've replaced it with the list that it replaced on 9 July 2013, and no other articles transclude it. The creator has no edits since September 2013 so I didn't see it as likely that he would be responsive to a request to finish the project. Largoplazo (talk) 11:11, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Fringe episodes[edit]

Propose merging Template:Fringe episodes with Template:Fringe.
Could be dealt with by a single navbox. No need for two. Especially when {{Fringe}} is transcluded on all the episode articles anyway. Rob Sinden (talk) 09:46, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:2012 Cascadia Cup[edit]

unnecessary template Joeykai (talk) 04:10, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:2011 Vancouver Whitecaps FC roster[edit]

kind of pointless to have a template for this Joeykai (talk) 04:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete - contents can be merged into the only article that uses it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:31, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

July 27[edit]

Template:Early Aviators[edit]

External link template created in 2007. Still only three transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:43, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep stable website with over 400 biographies of early aviators. There are over 50 links in articles to the website that can be transferred to the standardized template. Every link at Early Birds of Aviation that is blue can get the template and then Wikidata can read in the data. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:47, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep for now to help standardize and track external links —PC-XT+ 01:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Daat enc[edit]

External link template, created in 2008. Only six transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:31, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep. I'm the creator. The corresponding template in the Hebrew Wikipedia has over 500 transclusions. It helps to link to the daat.co.il website, which is a rich library of sources about Judaism. The English Wikipedia has over 200 links to that website, which should be converted to the template. (It would be nice to get Citoid support, too.) --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:50, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep for now to help standardize and track external links and references —PC-XT+ 01:11, 28 July 2016 (UTC) 02:48, 28 July 2016 (UTC) Note that I haven't tried converting the above links to this template. The actual template url doesn't seem to be used in these links, though it may be an old style of the same thing —PC-XT+ 02:54, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Authorid[edit]

Unused user test. If still needed, userfy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep. It serves as an example of something that can be done (even if not currently used), and I anticipate using it in future discussions. Userfying would require changing a bunch of links, and make it more tedious to use. There does not appear to be any harm in retaining it. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:BOTW[edit]

External link template, created 2011, with only one transclusion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:39, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Weak delete as little used. I found one other article that could transclude it, but the only other pages with this url are not in article space and I'm not sure why the template uses two slashes after the domain —PC-XT+ 01:19, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:BillboardDB[edit]

External link template, created in 2007, and still with only two transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:38, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete Weak keep for now as there are many links, some of which could possibly use this (note that I haven't found any appropriate uses, yet, and may very well change to delete) —PC-XT+ 01:22, 28 July 2016 (UTC) 01:52, 28 July 2016 (UTC) These are mainly used as references and I found no use for this template in article space —PC-XT+ 02:40, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Fullerverse[edit]

Given that the article in question was recently deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fullerverse, do we really need this? This seems to have been created around the same time. We have {{Bryan Fuller}} to deal with most of the links. Rob Sinden (talk) 15:18, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete - I was going to suggest it be renamed {{Bryan Fuller}} and adapted to be more real-world, but we have that already.— TAnthonyTalk 16:02, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Genealogics[edit]

Unused external link templates. Were previously discussed in 2008. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:25, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Question: What made them unused? Lack of a parameter for "# of generations", or were they surpassed by another template? —PC-XT+ 01:02, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
    • The links I'm finding for the first template in the external links section aren't currently using any template, but I'm also finding use in references, so I'm thinking the templates could be used, but not sure how much —PC-XT+ 01:32, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
The field for this data is in Wikidata, so no need for it here. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:01, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:EastEnders-stub[edit]

Listing here as a stub template with no category. This stub template is currently only used in a single article, and the editors at WP:EASTENDERS are not in the habit of writing stub articles any more (characters with little information are placed in longer lists rather than given independent stub articles), so I would suggest deleting it and replacing it with {{BBC-tv-stub}} on that one article. Note the category was deleted in January 2011. anemoneprojectors 10:19, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete like the category and replace per nom —PC-XT+ 01:04, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Deletedimage[edit]

No translcusions, doesn't seem to serve any obvious/useful purpose FASTILY 06:36, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:If copyright holder[edit]

Unused, no obvious use which couldn't (and should) be substituted by {{Di-no permission}} FASTILY 06:34, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Wolf-Williams Racing[edit]

An unnecessary template begun by an editor known to the F1 project who persists in attempting to create pages etc. for Wolf-Williams, despite consensus to the contrary. This team is not a separate entity to Frank Williams Racing Cars; it is not treated as such by the sport's governing body and is covered by the FWRC Wiki page. This has been communicated to the creator of the page on several occasions, but to no avail. Eagleash (talk) 12:40, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep. I'm not seeing a reason for deletion in your comment. If it's part of that team, why are the links in the template proposed for deletion not in the navbox for FWRC, which is {{Frank Williams Racing Cars}}? --Izno (talk) 17:02, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure which links you mean exactly, as a number of them are included in both templates. In terms of personnel, those who were involved, for a very short time, with the temporarily re-named team (W-W) would not necessarily be considered notable by F1 Proj. convention in the context of FWRC. However, there are one or two drivers who could be included at FWRC, but the majority at the W-W template do not have a strong case for inclusion. Just by way of background the history of FWRC around this time was rather complicated with multiple driver, sponsor etc. changes. A driver who took part in just one practice session (Kuwashima) for W-W, for example, has no basis for inclusion in either template. The convention is to include, at the most, drivers who at least achieved a points finish. No driver did so for W-W, so would not be included at FWRC. Eagleash (talk) 04:30, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 04:16, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Cc-by-nc-nd-2.0-be[edit]

NC/ND licenses are forbidden on enwp. Probably meets criteria for WP:CSD#T2 as well FASTILY 01:07, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

July 26[edit]

Template:Vaughan Williams Memorial Library[edit]

External link template, created 2006, with only two transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:52, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:SADAIC[edit]

External link template, created 2006. Used 12 times on one article, but all links are 404. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:43, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Subst and delete so more linkrot tools can handle them, but first, please remove the deprecated <tt> tags or change them to <kbd> or another appropriate alternative —PC-XT+ 03:08, 27 July 2016 (UTC) 03:58, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:KSM[edit]

{{KSM}} is an external link template, created 2008, with only two transclusions. {{KSM2}}, created the same year, is unused. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:36, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Folkinfo song[edit]

External link template, with only two transclusions after ten years. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Discogs[edit]

Pointless wrapper template; interferes with data export to and import from Wikidata. Only 62 transclusions (compare with 4968 transclusions of {{Discogs artist}}, just one of the four templates it wraps). Should be Subst:, then deleted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:00, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Loudr album[edit]

Unused external link template with red link to article about source website. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:49, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Philadelphia Sports Hall of Fame navigational boxes[edit]

These navbox templates contain links to those who have been inducted into the Philadelphia Sports Hall of Fame, a regional hall of fame of relatively minor note. Induction into this hall of fame is not a defining atrribute of the inductees and should not be used as a dimension of navigation. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:31, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. This is clearly overtemplate-ization in my opinion. Rikster2 (talk) 16:53, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete I agree. Membership in this HOF isn't so important that it deserved these navboxes. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete. Local HOF, which has no significance outside of Philadelphia. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:08, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Cbl62 (talk) 22:36, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Merge It seems like I likely have a lost cause here. I'm not very active on Wikipedia anymore, but I did a lot of work on this page. I understand now it is a bit overkill for a local sports hall of fame, and doesn't mean much to anyone outside of Philadelphia. But if there was any way to merge these together into one template, I would appreciate that. But I understand if they need to be deleted. Do what you you feel is best, I guess. Peetlesnumber1 (talk) 01:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete or merge and treat similarly to {{Florida Sports Hall of Fame}} Listify to reduce navbox creep while retaining the information —PC-XT+ 03:51, 27 July 2016 (UTC) 00:38, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
PC-XT, the information in these navboxes is already listed at Philadelphia Sports Hall of Fame. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Ok, great! I looked there before I !voted. I don't know how I missed that huge yellow table. I wonder if my browser failed to display it, or if I somehow skipped over it. Weird. Anyway, the main template is using the old practice of linking to other templates, which is more like how a category works. I don't know if this could be turned into categories, though, since it's not defining. So, because the information is already listed, I'm changing my !vote to delete. —PC-XT+ 06:53, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
PC-XT, we don't need categories for this either. It's not defining. Jweiss11 (talk) 16:28, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm in favor of deleting Template:Florida Sports Hall of Fame as well, but it isn't totally obvious to me that the Philly and Florida navboxes are two peas in a pod to the extent that they need to be co-nominated. Template:Huskies of Honor navbox, Template:Italian American Sports Hall of Fame, Template:National Jewish Sports Hall of Fame, Template:University of Florida Athletic Hall of Fame are also good candidates for deletion. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:07, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Alright. Following general practice, I'll strike the part of my !vote connecting the templates, and we can discuss the others separately from this one, if needed after we see how this discussion closes —PC-XT+ 06:15, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Countries by most used web browser[edit]

Displays patent nonsense: The image belongs to June 2015 while the legend given for it is for a non-existent June 2016 map. For example, the color red on the image does not represent Opera Mini, purple does not represent Android Browser and blue does not represent Microsoft Edge.

If one cannot give correct information, one must not give wrong information. The correct course of action, which is editing the template to show the correct info is already tried and met with a revert. Hence, TfD is the next stop. Codename Lisa (talk) 09:07, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

  • That's a shame. Either establish the correct information, even if a table is needed per User:FleetCommand, or delete per nom —PC-XT+ 03:11, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Polish coats of arms by Tadeusz Gajl[edit]

Unused license template. May contain terms incompatible with CC-SA-2.5: requires files to be < 150x150 FASTILY 06:41, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:PTAF[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G6 by Edgar181 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 21:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I would love to speedy this, but there's no criterion to do so. This navbox template is on one article, and does nothing but redirect to the article. MSJapan (talk) 06:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete as redundant to links... We've discussed such a CSD, before. I believe I said I'd support a CSD for navboxes transcluded on fewer than 3 pages. I don't know of a reason to keep them. I forgot why the criterion wasn't implemented. —PC-XT+ 06:45, 26 July 2016 (UTC) 08:17, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-conducive to building an encyclopedia. It is not a real navbox as it provides no helpful navigation. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 12:30, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete per criterion G6. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:28, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Ah, thanks for reminding me G6 could be used for this! I think that's what I was trying to remember, above. —PC-XT+ 03:15, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete That's missing of information, i'm not afraid this template, i think only few information would be better more information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Junior5a (talkcontribs) 01:37, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

July 25[edit]

Template:SFRH[edit]

External link template, created 2008, but only one transclusion, and that does not link to the stated target. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:55, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Stromkern[edit]

The band itself does not have notability, much less its albums. —swpbT 19:50, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Catholic Online[edit]

External link template, created in 2007; single transclusion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:40, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

July 24[edit]

Template:Birth date and age[edit]

Propose merging Template:Birth date and age with Template:Birth-date and age.
These templates serve the same purpose. The only difference is the format in which they take the date parameters. Since {{Birth date and age}} is use significantly more (ratio of 61:1) I feel that {{Birth-date and age}} should be merged into this. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

NOTE: since {{Birth date and age}} is fully protected I was unable to tag it. --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:49, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Question: As the original programmer of the "hyphenless" template, which is used on over 450,000 pages, I worry that a premature merge could cause confusion - even consternation. What advantage would the merge do, other than eliminating an apparently extra wiki page? Are we sure that there is nothing that would go wrong if we merge the two templates? --Uncle Ed (talk) 00:52, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Don't merge. "Birth-date and age" allows copy-pasting a dmy or mdy string into it (like 1 January 1980), which greatly speeds up (my) editing. "Birth date and age" requires typing in numbers and pipelines, which is tedious on some keyboards. Materialscientist (talk) 04:41, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Don't merge. This template is of great value to me, as means that I can add an age to a date, without having to tediously convert a date to YYYY-MM-DD. If you do merge, please keep this function.--Auric talk 11:57, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Merge if and only if it's possible to preserve the functionality of {{Birth-date and age}}. All arguments against merging relate to the different parameters, but it should be very possible to change {{Birth date and age}} so that it uses the one-parameter approach if one parameter is supplied and the multiple-parameter approach if more than one parameter is supplied. The additional parameters in {{Birth-date and age}} could be converted to named parameters of {{Birth date and age}}. ~ Rob13Talk 13:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Actually, I thought of a better solution. {{Birth date and age}} could be converted to a wrapper of {{Birth-date and age}} very easily and then placed in Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted to keep all transclusions at {{Birth-date and age}}, which has extra functionality. We could preserve {{Birth date and age}} as a wrapper to allow editor usage to go uninterrupted while minimizing the costs of maintaining two templates at the same time. @Zackmann08, Ed Poor, Auric, and Materialscientist: Thoughts on this? It seems to address all your concerns about lost functionality and editor confusion while still helping us efficiently maintain one template instead of two. ~ Rob13Talk 16:11, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
      Don't get me wrong: I'm not implacably opposed to a merge. BUT: what sort of extensive testing regimen do you propose to make sure nothing disappoints our readers? Would we make a new template and then carefully test it on a small subset of bio pages, like a dozen or so? --Uncle Ed (talk) 01:14, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
      • I would oppose that action. The hyphenated template is inferior, and does not properly emit microformat markup. Its attempt to emit Gregorian dates is utterly broken: the emitted HTML of {{Birth-date and age| 12 April 1041 |gregorian=y}} , just now, showed a Julian date of "2016-07-26UTC04:27:39" - the hours and minutes being the current UTC time but out by twelve hours. There was also a separate title attribute of "1041-04-12" - a bogus attempt to present a Julian date in ISO format. If anything, the wrapper should be applied the other way around, or indeed the hyphenated template should be replaced and deleted.
  • Oppose per my comment above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:32, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment: @Materialscientist, Ed Poor, BU Rob13, and Pigsonthewing: I want to be clear that my suggestion to merge the templates meant to also merge the functionality! I agree that being able to include a date without converting to YYYY-MM-DD is handy. Seems like there should be a way to check the first parameter. if it is a straight integer, then treat it as a YYYY, if is not, then treat it as a date like the {{Birth-date and age}} template does. In other words, both {{birth date and age|1990|1|2}} and {{birth date and age|January 2, 1990}} should work. I am NOT proposing eliminating the ability to supply a date in the format of "January 2, 1990". --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:41, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:List of people who have appeared on the cover of all "Big Four" editions of Vogue[edit]

Totally unsourced original research. Copies the contents of the equally badly-sourced OR article List of people who have appeared on the cover of all "Big Four" editions of Vogue. Randykitty (talk) 19:49, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Loudr artist[edit]

External-link template with only two transclusions after two years; red link to parent site. (note that Category:Loudr templates will be empty of this is deleted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:50, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:X-Wing series[edit]

Redundant template because of {{Star Wars games}}. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 10:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Catholic mysticism[edit]

Propose merging Template:Catholic mysticism with Template:Christian mysticism.
Since User:Jujutsuan failed to gain WP:CON to rename Template:Christian mysticism in this discussion, he chose create Template:Catholic mysticism as a duplicate of it instead (see WP:FORK). While he has added some new Catholic-related links to the (already long) Christian Template, the template itself is added to the bottom/top of some pages that already have the first template. It just makes no sense to have two template on the same pages with most link duplicated in both. One obvious fix would be to only keep the currently duplicated links in just one template or the other, Jujutsuan objects to this as unnecessary. Jujutsuan has (so far) mostly added the Template:Catholic mysticism template to pages (that he thinks are) about mysticism literature, but has never given a reason to have the two similar templates. tahc chat 16:16, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

The reason is WP:SUBPOV. This was actually Chicbyaccident's idea, not mine. The original version of this, which was quickly redirected to {{Christian mysticism}} to let the RM finish, was deleted to make way for the un-userfying of the current version, but you can check out its talk page and the RM to see that it's true. I'd say I added a lot of new links, to plenty of people as well as literature. I don't just think they're relevant, they were all (or virtually all) in categories that indicated their relevance. I mean, we could merge Christian mysticism into Catholic mysticism, but then the template would be undeniably Catholic-oriented. (Tell me, are any of the links in the Catholic one not about Catholicism?) So here's the choice, Tahc: change the name to "Catholic mysticism" and merge, or have two separate templates, one as an overview, one more comprehensive about the Catholic SUBPOV. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} talk | contribs) 17:31, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Either merge into the Christian mysticism template or, better, change the Catholic template to a footer. Side and footer templates are used on the same page, even if they contain duplicate listings, so to differentiate the two that would be one solution. As said, if not a footer, merge into Christian mysticism (maybe some of the literature should be in both templates as well). Randy Kryn 13:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 00:57, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:KP QWP & others[edit]

Does not seem to be a reason to put the number in a template rather than just directly in the single article in which it is used. WOSlinker (talk) 09:33, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

  • The templates are for use in the political party's article, plus the article for the legislative body. Except for "PakSen JIP" (which was previously created for Senate of Pakistan), these other templates are new and have only been applied to the party-specific articles. Eventually, I will add them to the articles for their corresponding assemblies, where they can also be used for calculated values for the size of ruling & opposition coalitions, as well as a count of total vacant seats. The objective is to reduce editing time, page histories, and errors. Farolif (talk) 15:58, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
    • If they are kept, then each of them could do with some documentation stating what the figure represents, as at the moment, it's not very clear. -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 00:18, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Apparently, it is perceived that there needs to be more discussion on this matter, but I'm not sure how much more needs to be said. In the time since the selection of templates were flagged, I have also introduced "Punjab PPP" and "Punjab JI" into the article for Provincial Assembly of the Punjab in exactly the way I outlined previously. Farolif (talk) 02:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • What about using WikiData for these? —PC-XT+ 05:34, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    • I haven't explored WikiData as an option. What would be the advantages of using that vs the current template method? Farolif (talk) 02:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
      • WikiData can be used on other projects, similar to files on Commons. It would need to be set up, though. I'm not sure what the best way to do it would be, but it might be worth looking into... —PC-XT+ 05:00, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
        • WikiData still requires a code to call up the piece of data within an article. Maybe I'm oversimplifying the platform's functions, but how does that remedy the original concern in this case? Farolif (talk) 16:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
          • The original concern of data storage in template space would disappear. WikiData would use parserfunction calls instead of templates, with much the same result. The documentation concern should be handled by part of setup on WikiData one time, instead of once per template. A drawback is that retrieving a different article's WikiData entry is expensive, so it may be better to have a copy for each page, for better performance. The templates can be used anywhere on Wikipedia relatively cheaply. WikiData can be used on other projects relatively cheaply if assigned to the page using it, meaning one or two copies of the data to update in total instead of one template or hardcoded data to update per language. Template names are easier to work with than WikiData identifiers. It's still not obvious to me that WikiData would be better, but the trade-off may have some advantages. —PC-XT+ 17:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
            • The original concern was not template space. The original question raised by WOSlinker was the purpose of creating the templates in the first place. The only space that could potentially be saved is in the documentation of said purpose, which the OP has expressed should be added in order to justify the objects' existence to other users that might stumble across them as well. Farolif (talk) 16:56, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
              • I was reading the nomination as asking why template space is being used for these. I'm not talking about space as a measurement, such as number of characters, but an area, as in, having the prefix "Template:" similar to article space or user space. (I'm actually not sure how much the size of template documentation really matters, as it's not transcluded.) To simply avoid the need to document every template, another idea is to organize these as subpages of one template which has the documentation. —PC-XT+ 02:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
                • I understood what you meant by "space", and that's still not what the nomination was concerned about. How about we skip the tedious documentation entirely, since it should otherwise be obvious to an editor (ie - one who would find these in the first place) what the objects are used for? Farolif (talk) 04:03, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
                  • In general, every template should have documentation. Simple subtemplates often don't, instead relying on the main template's documentation. Templates are often misunderstood, even hardcoded ones. Hardcoded templates have no code to look at for purpose, so we need to rely only on usecases to figure them out, which is unreliable. If there are not many usecases, vandalism or accidental damage can easily hide the purpose without any indication to anyone looking at it for the first time. It's hard to check for this. Though original usecases can often be found in the author's contributions around the time the template was created and edited, this can be rather tedious, and they don't always show the full purpose. —PC-XT+ 04:41, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

July 23[edit]

Template:USAFAwards[edit]

orphan, perhaps after being merged with an article? (See below discussion) —PC-XT+ 22:33, 23 July 2016 (UTC) 22:36, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

US Coast Guards Awards[edit]

These templates are all only used in Awards and decorations of the United States Coast Guard, and are being used to hold article content; table of medals and decorations. These are all simpy table which would be easier to maintain by placing content directly in the articel rather than hiding it in a template. Recommend substituing the contents into the article and then deleting the templates. Whpq (talk) 20:38, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I concur with that idea. I've moved the information from the templates to the USCG award page but left the templates alone. --McChizzle (talk) 21:08, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Twitter status[edit]

Redundant to the superior {{Cite tweet}} (for which it could probably be made a wrapper, before Subst:itution qand deletion). {{Cite tweet}} has 937 transclusions; {{Twitter status}} has 287. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:36, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Is there a way to port the Twitter status ones to cite tweet before it gets deleted? AngusWOOF (barksniff) 17:46, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
The nom suggested wrapping for substitution, which means converting this template to use cite tweet, then having an automated tool substitute all transclusions, leaving cite tweet as the template in use —PC-XT+ 20:09, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete after replacement per nom —PC-XT+ 20:09, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment – use of {{Twitter status}} should be restricted to 'External links' sections. Failing that, then delete. --IJBall (contribstalk) 23:38, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment – It was already used by many articles which may breakup. so please do the restrict on external links and keep this Template - Jenith (talk) 05:03, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment I have yet to find any example of this template in external links sections, rather than as a reference. It's hard to conceive of a case where it would be needed as such. Do IJBall, Yjenith or anyone else have examples? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:37, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete after replacing. Seeing the transclusions in action, I concur with the nominator. As for iJBall's comment, we have {{Twitter}} to cover that area already. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Types of state[edit]

bad use of a navbox to present content. this should be moved to an article and reformatted as a standard table or prose. as it stands now, it's creating floating empty sections in several articles in mobile view (and print view) because navboxes are excluded from mobile view (and print view). Frietjes (talk) 13:08, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Comment: Would moving the template to the end of the page (and/or collapsing it) help? I created this for pages like List of Iron Age states. I think the information is all unneeded in any form-- and was repetitive to have on each list as prose or as a table. I considered moving them to Template:Types of state and making it small text to be a compromise. What if we just make it a list of linked names of the types of state with out the inline descriptions. tahc chat 15:00, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep. Hi. The contributions of Tahc (revision 731177625) and myself (revision 731582482) has turned this template into a valid navbox, ready to be transcluded on several articles. Practically, it is not transcluded in any of the appropriate articles and all its existing transclusions—except one—are inappropriate. But this is a problem that can be solved with editing, not deletion. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:00, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep per above edits. tahc chat 14:17, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep as a true navbox per the recent edits; I'm sure transclusion cleanup won't be a problem, either —PC-XT+ 03:33, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Cross-platform[edit]

Unused template.

Originally created for use in {{Infobox software}} but we already have {{Plain list}} and {{Hidden}}. Plus, this template generates a redundant "Cross-platform" label; all modern software are cross-platform anyway and the reader understands this fact when he or she sees several operating systems or platforms listed. Codename Lisa (talk) 12:45, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Yeah, "cross-platform" is only helpful if the list is truncated, which hopefully isn't an issue, here. Delete as redundant after replacing per nom —PC-XT+ 19:51, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Navabox[edit]

Redundant to {{Rio}} and {{Angry Birds}}, misnamed, other problems; almost could speedy as test... What do you think? —PC-XT+ 00:56, 23 July 2016 (UTC) —PC-XT+ 00:58, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete. Looks like a test version of {{Rio}} but cannot be practically used. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 12:47, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

July 22[edit]

Template:Source needs translation[edit]

I came across this in 2016 Munich shootings and can't see the point of it. The template documentation doesn't help and so, as a cleanup tag, this doesn't seem actionable. Note that copyright considerations would prevent us from actually translating recent sources. Andrew D. (talk) 20:44, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete - the template in its current form makes no sense. Rami R 20:49, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete - Agreed. It seems rather pointless. Parsley Man (talk) 04:14, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete; we don't translate the sources even when they aren't subject to copyright, so why would we translate recent sources? Nyttend (talk) 10:49, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - I suggest everyone reads WP:RSUE: When quoting a non-English source (whether in the main text or in a footnote), a translation into English should always accompany the quote. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 09:14, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
    But what does that have to do with the template? It says "source needs translation", not "quote needs translation", and links to Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English - a page dedicated to translating on-wiki content, not external sources. Rami R 01:56, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete as redundant to {{Request quotation}}, which isn't as confusing Keep if the documentation is improved to explain it is for translating quotes and not the entire source. Would it help to rename it to {{Quote needs translation}}? —PC-XT+ 01:34, 28 July 2016 (UTC) 03:29, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
    This isn't just focusing the template usuage, it's completely changing it's purpose. I could not find this template placed next to an actual quote. Rami R 01:56, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
    Some documentation says to use it according to WP:NONENG (same as WP:RSUE) but if the quote isn't obvious, the template has no way of telling which part of the source needs translation, so alright, maybe a new template for that purpose would be better than this confusion; I'll change my !vote —PC-XT+ 03:24, 28 July 2016 (UTC) 03:34, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Fascism[edit]

I see no reason to keep this template for this subproject of another project. It's been inactive since 2012. One problem is that the class parameter does not pass along (just fascism-importance one) so it has to be restored to the original politics template to work. Ricky81682 (talk) 19:32, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete as redundant to and surpassed by the politics template (Thanks for the clear examples) —PC-XT+ 01:36, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Blocked user[edit]

There is no legitimate need for this template. If any user tries to make an edit to a blocked user's talk page, they are automatically presented with a very prominent red banner which states "This user is currently blocked" along with the most recent block log entry for the user. The same red banner is automatically presented when a blocked user's contributions are viewed. Additionally, there is definitely a badge-of-shame aura to this template (potentially constitutes harassment/gravedancing for the blocked user); a similar concern prompted the redesign of Template:Banned user and caused Template:BannedMeansBanned to be deleted at this TfD. For now, I can understand the informative nature of {{Sockpuppet}} and {{Banned user}}, but it seems that there is no scenario where a template like this would be absolutely necessary to inform the community that a user is blocked, especially given the potential badge-of-shame aspect of the template. Mz7 (talk) 04:00, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep for now but see about converting existing uses to {{Sock}} and {{IPsock}}, which appears to be what most are currently used for. I'd rather do those conversions first (which would need to be done anyway as part of deleting) and then re-evaluate what's left to see if there's a real need for this. It's difficult at the moment to wade through the sockpuppetry stuff to find any non-sock usage of this template. I have a feeling I'll wind up at delete (as will most people), but it seems sensible to get a better idea of what these are currently used for before going ahead with a "final" decision. Thoughts on this, Mz7? ~ Rob13Talk 04:35, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi BU Rob13. I seem to have the opposite problem: it's difficult for me to wade through all the tags for non-sockpuppetry to find the ones where there is a clear sock master and {{sock}} would be better. I just randomly spot-checked six or so of the transclusions, though. I wouldn't mind doing those conversions first as long as it would be a practical task to do. Mz7 (talk) 04:49, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm leaning towards keep for now per Rob, but I don't have much working knowledge of the sock templates, so I'm hesitant to !vote on the practical side, but some work to that end would help us better understand use cases —PC-XT+ 01:31, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep I use this template myself on very rare occasions. It does not display in bright and flashing colors, celebrating a user's block. It is in fact a very subdued template, directly indicating a block exists, but with no intent to shame. I don't see it as "shaming" in any away. Of course, opinions may vary on this point, but that is my opinion. Safiel (talk) 19:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
I respect your opinion, of course, but I think the potential for shame comes more from how the template is used, rather than the template itself. A user page is typically a place to describe who you are and why want to contribute here. {{Blocked user}} generally requires blanking the entire user page to make way for it, and this seems equivalent to disregarding everything that the blocked user did to actually improve Wikipedia. Not every blocked user edited in bad-faith, and this template alone does a very poor job of communicating a user's original intentions. And even for users who were here in bad faith, one can easily discover that they are blocked when one attempts to edit their talk page or when one views their contributions. Under what such rare occasions would it truly be necessary to apply this template? Mz7 (talk) 22:52, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:SEC Football Legends navbox[edit]

Already too large for useful navigation and getting larger every year. One player from each team is added per year. This is not a defining characteristic for most of these players, so editors are left with two choices: give in to navbox cruft or don't transclude it on certain players' pages. The former is laughable (imagine placing this on Peyton Manning!) and the latter is against the guideline at WP:BIDIRECTIONAL. ~ Rob13Talk 02:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete per nom.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 21:01, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, unless we split it or something... —PC-XT+ 01:22, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment. Probably not appropriate material for a navbox, per nom. Would there be anything to be gained in converting it to a category, or is a simple list article (which already exists) enough for this topic? Ejgreen77 (talk) 19:11, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    • I wouldn't really oppose a category, myself, though defining characteristics are more of a category argument (WP:DEFINING and linked pages) —PC-XT+ 04:29, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:STATS FCS Coach of the Year[edit]

No useful navigation; premature. ~ Rob13Talk 02:29, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete per WP:NOTNOW, will support recreate at this rate in 2018.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 21:00, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete or userfy until 2018 per nom and bluejay —PC-XT+ 01:18, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Rudy Award (collegiate)[edit]

No useful navigation. Only two links. ~ Rob13Talk 02:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Comment Would winners of this award satisfy GNG.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 21:01, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
@UCO2009bluejay: Not by virtue of the award, no. This award is basically a character/courage/good guy type award, so it doesn't fit the major national award required for #1 of WP:NCOLLATH. ~ Rob13Talk 01:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete for now or userfy as premature until the names have articles to link —PC-XT+ 01:05, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete the website only updated to 2010 and the prior names will likely never have their own articles; therefore, it is not useful for navigation.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 02:33, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Old discussions[edit]

July 21[edit]

Template:Scott Walker series[edit]

unused and only connects two articles. Frietjes (talk) 16:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I'd say delete as redundant to links and maybe put the image somewhere else if needed —PC-XT+ 01:44, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:EIIRseries[edit]

unused. Frietjes (talk) 15:05, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • I'm not sure what the point is but maybe they had planned to add links... If so, it should be userfied, otherwise delete —PC-XT+ 01:49, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Lst[edit]

Unnecessary template. Why is it necessary to abstract a link to Help:Labeled section transclusion into a template? Pppery (talk) 13:29, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Dhaka Dynamites[edit]

out-of-date roster, no use for future (if any) editions of the competition Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment These four identical nominations have been combined into one nomination. Primefac (talk) 20:20, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep - All these teams are existing while the tournament is also running and scheduled to have its 4th edition later this year. The wholesale nominations of contents related to Bangladesh Premier League by this user is getting disruptive. --Zayeem (talk) 01:15, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Rangpur Riders current squad[edit]

This being duplication of Template:Rangpur Riders Roster and is anyway out of date and of no useful purpose for future (if any) editions of BPL Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Sylhet Super Stars squad[edit]

This being duplication of Template:Sylhet Super Stars current squad and is anyway out of date and of no useful purpose for future (if any) editions of BPL Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Sylhet Super Stars current squad[edit]

This being duplication of Template:Sylhet Super Stars squad and is anyway out of date and of no useful purpose for future (if any) editions of BPL Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Sylhet Royals squad[edit]

Sylhet Royals ceasing to exist in 2013, there being no "current" squad for defunct team Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 12:27, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment As all of these nominations are for identical reasons (and the type is the same) I have combined them into one nomination. Note that while this nomination specifically mentions Sylhet Royals, each individual nomination gave the name of the team. Primefac (talk) 20:16, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanking you again, Primefac. This is a learning point for me and I will be making sure in future I am looking to combine multiple cases. Thank you. Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 08:32, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete - If none of these teams exist any more, there's obviously no reason to keep these templates. – PeeJay 15:02, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Largest metropolitan areas of Tamil Nadu[edit]

'Largest' is POV. Looking at the title, only Chennai would qualify for the 'metropolitan' status. Vensatry (talk) 11:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Intoacircle[edit]

Navigation template with only two articles, therefore not necessary as an aid to navigation between the two articles. anemoneprojectors 07:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete as redundant to links —PC-XT+ 02:00, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:PD-musical scale[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete as unused and unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13Talk 02:33, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Unused license tag, replaceable by {{PD-ineligible}} FASTILY 06:28, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment These five separate nominations have been combined into one, as the rationale (and type) are all identical. Primefac (talk) 20:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Pitchfork10.0[edit]

I don't see this as being encyclopedic. If there can be an navbox on this, what's stopping people from making navboxes for albums Rolling Stone or AllMusic have rated five stars, or half-stars, or three stars, etc.? FamblyCat94 (talk) 02:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete. I don't think Pitchfork is so noteworthy that this is a truly special thing needing a navbox. Perfect scores from Rolling Stone? Ok, I'm on board. But an online publication with an Alexa ranking below 2,000? Nope. ~ Rob13Talk 02:29, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Pac-12 Conference men's soccer seasons navbox[edit]

Two links... Corkythehornetfan 05:35, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep per WP:REDLINK (not broken) with clear WP:GNG subjects. UW Dawgs (talk) 15:52, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete as per WP:EXISTING and WP:NAVBOX. We don't use navboxes for non-existent articles because our guidelines say navboxes are used to (quoting NAVBOX) "facilitate navigation between ... articles". Per WP:REDNOT, excessive red links are not used in navboxes. ~ Rob13Talk 04:41, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Premature, delete or userfy at least until another year turns blue (preferably both unlinked years) —PC-XT+ 03:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Atlantic 10 Conference Baseball Player of the Year navbox[edit]

Two links not enough to navigate... Corkythehornetfan 05:16, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep per WP:REDLINK (not broken) with clear WP:GNG subjects. UW Dawgs (talk) 15:52, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Meh, weak keep at 3 blue links, now. If more are coming, this can stay. I'm not opposed to keeping a few of these short term. —PC-XT+ 07:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete as per WP:EXISTING and WP:NAVBOX. We don't use navboxes for non-existent articles because our guidelines say navboxes are used to (quoting NAVBOX) "facilitate navigation between ... articles". Per WP:REDNOT, excessive red links are not used in navboxes. No prejudice against immediately recreating this when we have 4-5 links, but it's not clear that more of these articles will be written soon. ~ Rob13Talk 04:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Hidden title[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was keep. I recommend discussing the move further at Wikipedia talk:The Wikipedia Adventure. We typically don't keep redirects from template space to a back-end space like Wikipedia: or User:, so it may be possible that The Wikipedia Adventure needs to change some things to make a new template name work. Or maybe this is an exception where we should leave the redirect. Either way, further discussion on that topic would be helpful. ~ Rob13Talk 02:26, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Template doesn't make sense to me. Under what circumstance would one want to completely hide a page's title. In at least two occurences (User:Jojit fb, User talk:Jojit fb), this template is being used to circumvent the restrictions on the {{DISPLAYTITLE}} parser function, making the title in the header not resolve to the actual page name. Such fake titles also have counter-intuitive behavior when one tries to select the title. Pppery (talk) 01:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment This template is used entirely on The Wikipedia Adventure on their subpages, ostensibly to avoid having titles like Wikipedia:TWA/1/Reasons/The Mission used on the top of the page. The example given by the nom does not use this template. While I am neutral on whether this is kept or deleted, at this point in time I think that if kept it should be moved into TWA as a subpage and used only for that purpose. Primefac (talk) 02:24, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
@Primefac: the example I gave has been edited since I filed this nomination. Pppery (talk) 11:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
So it was. My mistake. Primefac (talk) 15:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep if moved per Primefac, as there aren't many/any uses for this outside of TWA, otherwise subst and delete could be an option, though a template may be easier to track (It looks like the user page code could be based on the template or some related code, somewhere.) —PC-XT+ 04:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep @Pppery: Did you look at what links here (103 uses cases)? This template is intended for design purposes and it's used on Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure. Besides BTW everyone can decide how his own userpage should look like. --RezonansowyakaRezy (talk | contribs) 09:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

July 17[edit]

Template:West Virginia Intercollegiate Athletic Conference navbox[edit]

Defunct conference shouldn't be linked anymore and therefore not useful for navigation. UCO2009bluejay (talk) 22:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Corkythehornetfan 22:23, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
The author has been notified. Corkythehornetfan 22:51, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete it's basically orphaned now anyway. Msjraz64 (talk) 21:56, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Why should the conference being defunct causes us to delete a navbox? --Izno (talk) 17:29, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
It has been discussed here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 17#Defunct conferences.UCO2009bluejay (talk) 00:44, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per my comment below. ~ Rob13Talk 02:04, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Packers Retired Numbers Banners[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 02:04, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

No longer used in any articles. Was previously used in Green Bay Packers and List of Green Bay Packers retired numbers. I have redesigned List of Green Bay Packers retired numbers to a more standard tabular format and replaced the template in Green Bay Packers with the actual template content. Also, somewhat of a duplicate of {{Packers Retired Numbers}}. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:12, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete per the nom. --Izno (talk) 17:27, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Hong Kong football squad 1958 Asian Games[edit]

Less than four links. No useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 05:42, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep. There are links for professional footballer played for top-rank-league professional football teams and national football teams for major tournaments. We can see that some of links are using.hoising (talk) 03:21, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan 04:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and Corky. --Izno (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Hong Kong football squad 1954 Asian Games[edit]

Less than four links. No useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 05:41, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep. There are links for professional footballer played for top-rank-league professional football teams and national football teams for major tournaments. We can see that some of links are using.hoising (talk) 03:21, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan 04:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and Corky. --Izno (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Midwest Collegiate Conference navbox[edit]

Conference is no longer in existence. Therefore, this navbox is no longer needed. All schools have joined another conference or are independent. Corkythehornetfan 03:53, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Support and think about Template:West Virginia Intercollegiate Athletic Conference navbox as well–UCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Why is the conference going defunct a reason not to have a navbox related to the conference? --Izno (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. Because the conference is defunct, these schools are not so closely related that a navbox is warranted to navigate between them. Instead, they'll have other conference navboxes on their pages. ~ Rob13Talk 02:03, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

July 16[edit]

Template:Interwiki redirect[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was merge. ~ Rob13Talk 01:29, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Propose merging Template:Interwiki redirect with Template:Soft redirect.
Only 67 transclusions and {{soft redirect}} can do the job fine. I don't think it's necessary to have a separate template for this. nyuszika7h (talk) 19:34, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Support. {{Interwiki redirect}} seems pointless. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:13, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. When is a soft redirect not an interwiki redirect? The cases I can think of have their own templates like {{category redirect}}, or just also use the standard {{soft redirect}}, as at Wikipedia:Don't feed the divas.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  20:32, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support The two templates have the same use and {{Interwiki redirect}} has only 67 transclusions. Music1201 talk 17:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support a deletion of "interwiki redirect". That said, I think we should maybe consider updating "soft redirect" to be a little less ancient in its reference to the redirection arrow, which is unlikely to be intuitive. --Izno (talk) 17:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Support merge as redundant per nom —PC-XT+ 05:51, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Merge; redundant. Enterprisey (talk!(formerly APerson) 04:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Tprod[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 01:33, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Undocumented template draft, created in May 2006 in the wake of the Userbox War, this template was apparently supposed to be an inline version of {{Prod}} intended to be used for PRODing templates. Proposed in the now historical Wikipedia talk:T1 and T2 debates, the idea newer was implemented. Sam Sailor Talk! 19:14, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom as an unused template. --Izno (talk) 17:31, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete as unused test that probably shouldn't be marked historical since it was never implemented —PC-XT+ 06:08, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Prod-reason[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Given the existing transclusions which would need to be substituted or replaced, I'll recreate this as a redirect after deletion. ~ Rob13Talk 01:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Redundant to the slightly older {{Prod hint}}. Used 13 times between 2006 and 2009, and once in 2012. Sam Sailor Talk! 17:53, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete or perhaps redirect as redundant because it seems inferior in that it doesn't include a header (I can't think of a reason why we would need a separate template without a header) and the wording doesn't sound better —PC-XT+ 06:22, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:PRODWarning-notalk[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete as unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13Talk 01:37, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Redundant to {{Proposed deletion}}, only used on three occasions, and not used since 2008. Sam Sailor Talk! 16:26, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

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

Various bowl game navboxes[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation (two bowl games or less). ~ Rob13Talk 15:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete. I've replaced the Davidson navbox on 1969 Tangerine Bowl with the program navbox. Mackensen (talk) 15:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep. Rob doesn't cite a policy nor guideline which defines it. Also, what if the boxes are deleted and the program subsequently makes it to a third bowl game afterwards? Tom Danson (talk) 15:58, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
@Tom Danson: then the navbox will (rightfully) be recreated?UCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
@Tom Danson: The above ping likely didn't work due to technical limitations, so I'm pinging on UCO2009bluejay's behalf. (The ping has to be on a new line with a new signature.) nyuszika7h (talk) 20:40, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
    • See WP:EXISTING. While it isn't written into a guideline, there's a plethora of TfD precedent that four links is a minimum for navboxes. If there are more coaches in the future, the navbox can be undeleted. ~ Rob13Talk 05:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan 18:20, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Cbl62 (talk) 13:40, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment. If these are deleted, the bowl games should be added to the existing football team navboxes and those boxes should replace the bowl game navboxes on the individual bowl game articles. I'll happily volunteer for such duty once this discussion is over. Also, keep Alcorn State. It has four bowl appearances but several of the articles are unwritten at present. Mackensen (talk) 13:51, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Conditional merge per Mackensen provided WP:CFB creates standardized allowance for teams with less than the number of minimum number of bowl games necessary for the navbox (more than 4-5 should be granted their own navbox). If exception is tabled or rejected then deleteUCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Lacrosse coach navboxes[edit]

Not enough links to make navigation worthwhile (two linked coaches or less). ~ Rob13Talk 15:38, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep. Again, Rob doesn't cite a policy nor guideline which backs up his standards for "worthwhile navigation. Also, what if the boxes are deleted and the programs subsequently hire a third lacrosse coach soon afterwards? Tom Danson (talk) 16:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
    • See WP:EXISTING. While it isn't written into a guideline, there's a plethora of TfD precedent that four links is a minimum for navboxes. If there are more coaches in the future, the navbox can be undeleted. ~ Rob13Talk 05:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
      • See also WP:NAVBOX which is clear that navboxes are for navigation and to "group articles". ~ Rob13Talk 01:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan 18:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:President of the Philippines timeline[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete as unused and a template which could only ever be used in a single article. Strength of arguments based on typical practice at TfD and the listed reasons for deletion is strongly on the side of deletion. ~ Rob13Talk 01:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Unnecessary template. We don't need a template for this. I replaced the timeline in the "President of the Philippines" article, which was this template's only article namespace link, with a better-designed version. — Mediran [talk] 10:54, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

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

Template:Top Gear nav[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 01:40, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Redundant template. Formerly used in the infobox of TV season articles, however convention is to just link to the main episode list, per infobox instructions. All seasons are linked in {{Top Gear}} which is the navbox used in these articles. There is no need for two templates that link to all season articles. AussieLegend () 09:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete as redundant to the navbox. --Izno (talk) 17:34, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

July 15[edit]

Template:User Best Banana[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was speedy keep. No argument for deletion and wrong venue. Userboxes are discussed at WP:MfD. ~ Rob13Talk 17:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

VarunFEB2003 I am Online 13:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Keep as you have made no argument at all for deletion. Pppery (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
wrong venue. per the instructions at the top of WP:TFD, user boxes are discussed at WP:MFD. Frietjes (talk) 16:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:User Grade Ten[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was speedy keep. No argument for deletion and wrong venue. Userboxes are discussed at WP:MfD. ~ Rob13Talk 17:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

VarunFEB2003 I am Online 12:59, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Keep as you have made no argument at all for deletion. Pppery (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
wrong venue. per the instructions at the top of WP:TFD, user boxes are discussed at WP:MFD. Frietjes (talk) 16:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:User likes Dog[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was speedy keep. No argument for deletion and wrong venue. Userboxes are discussed at WP:MfD. ~ Rob13Talk 17:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

VarunFEB2003 I am Online 12:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Keep as you have made no argument at all for deletion. Pppery (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
wrong venue. per the instructions at the top of WP:TFD, user boxes are discussed at WP:MFD. Frietjes (talk) 16:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Wake Forest Demon Deacons men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Meh, I'm kind of on the fence because it's almost good enough... if the one red link is notable, I'll say weak keep; if not, I'll say weak delete —PC-XT+ 19:40, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
    • @PC-XT: It's hard to say. On one hand, he was inducted into the North Carolina Sports Hall of Fame. On the other hand, it was mostly for his contributions in high school sports, which is what he appears to have exclusively coached since leaving Wake Forest. At the very least, we can probably say that no-one is going to rush to write an article on a high school sports coach. See here for the relevant article so you can make your own judgement. It's probably on the fence of notability. ~ Rob13Talk 01:04, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
      • Well, in that case, I'll strike my weak keep !vote, because I don't think we want it kept like this long-term, but if someone did establish the article, I would support restoration of this template. Thanks for the reply and link. —PC-XT+ 02:42, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Villanova Wildcats men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until all the articles are made —PC-XT+ 20:17, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:VCU Rams men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until most of the articles are established —PC-XT+ 22:23, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:UMBC Retrievers men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until all 4 articles are established —PC-XT+ 22:42, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:UCF Knights men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) for now as premature until most of the articles are established —PC-XT+ 22:46, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:UC Santa Barbara Gauchos men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) for now as premature until more of the articles are established —PC-XT+ 22:57, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Tulsa Golden Hurricane men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until all 4 articles are established —PC-XT+ 02:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:St. John's Red Storm men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom, as there have only been three coaches, and only one has an article, so it is very premature —PC-XT+ 02:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:South Florida Bulls men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) for now as premature until most of the articles have been established —PC-XT+ 03:01, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:SMU Mustangs men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until the articles are established —PC-XT+ 03:34, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Saint Joseph's Hawks men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) for now as premature until all the articles are established —PC-XT+ 06:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Rutgers Scarlet Knights men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until most of the coaches have articles —PC-XT+ 07:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Providence Friars men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until the articles are established —PC-XT+ 17:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Ohio State Buckeyes men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) for now as premature until there are enough articles —PC-XT+ 17:59, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:New Hampshire Wildcats men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) for now as premature until more articles are established —PC-XT+ 18:34, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:NC State Wolfpack men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until a couple more articles are established —PC-XT+ 18:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Michigan Wolverines men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete as redundant to wikilinks with only two coaches (one a red link) —PC-XT+ 18:53, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Memphis Tigers men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) for now as premature until the other articles are established —PC-XT+ 18:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Fordham Rams men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete as redundant to links with only two coaches, one red —PC-XT+ 19:11, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:East Tennessee State Buccaneers men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete as redundant to wikilinks with only two coaches —PC-XT+ 19:25, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Duke Blue Devils men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until more articles are established —PC-XT+ 21:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Dayton Flyers men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until more articles are established —PC-XT+ 21:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Davidson Wildcats men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until a couple more articles are established —PC-XT+ 21:16, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Campbell Fighting Camels men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until more articles are established —PC-XT+ 21:17, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:California Golden Bears men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until a couple more articles are established —PC-XT+ 21:18, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Cal Poly Mustangs men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until the other articles are established —PC-XT+ 21:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Butler Bulldogs men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete (or userfy) as premature until a couple more articles are established —PC-XT+ 21:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Texas Tech Red Raiders women's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • According to what policy? Hmlarson (talk) 21:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
  • See WP:EXISTING. There is plenty of TfD precedent that four links is a minimum for a useful navbox. ~ Rob13Talk 05:45, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for answering the question. Maybe next time you'll include it in your rationale. Hmlarson (talk) 00:11, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
WP:EXISTING is an essay; it explains precedent, but it isn't a policy/guideline, so I generally don't link to it in a rationale. This one as everything to do with common sense. Navigational boxes are for navigating, so a box that fails to navigate shouldn't be used in articles, obviously. ~ Rob13Talk 21:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • So, if I create articles to get rid of, at least, 2 red links, there would be no need to delete this template. --Wordbuilder (talk) 17:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • If you created the articles (and they weren't immediately nominated for deletion or slapped with a notability tag, of course), I'd withdraw my nomination, yes. This isn't useful as-is, and it shouldn't remain in articles while it isn't useful for navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 02:26, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm busy now, but I've saved the navbox to my sandbox. If it gets deleted but I later create sustainable articles, I can bring it back. --Wordbuilder (talk) 00:14, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Userfy for now until the articles are established so it can be restored once useful —PC-XT+ 18:29, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Clone Wars[edit]

Unnecessary template that lists the media that is set in or around one in-universe event of Star Wars, the Clone Wars. It fails WP:NAVBOX No. 1, as they are, collectively, not a "single, coherent subject". It is redundant because the content of this navbox is covered by several navboxes already. The main {{Star Wars}} navbox provides links to general articles, Category:Star Wars film navigational boxes has navboxes based upon Star Wars films, {{Star Wars games}} mentions video games, {{Star Wars comics}} comics, {{Star Wars Legends novels}} links to the "expanded universe" literature, while {{Star Wars canon novels}} mentions the "official canon" ones. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:05, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I've notified WP:WikiProject Star Wars to receive their input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 03:23, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:ARSS[edit]

This template that seems rather unnecessary for a few reasons. For one, it's only purpose seems to be to link to pages within Wikipedia with built-in paragraph formatting; this is redundant to manually linking pages within Wikipedia with paragraph formatting. And secondly, per the way Template:ARSS/1 is currently built, those internal pages within Wikipedia are set up as external links instead of internal links. (Even if this were to be fixed, this template still seems unnecessary. Also, the template's instructions since 2009 were to substitute the template ... which creates over a hundred lines of unnecessary code.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:31, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 03:21, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:ABS-CBN News personalities[edit]

Bad idea. We don't create cast navboxes. 98.230.192.179 (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 03:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Florida Gulf Coast Eagles men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete as redundant to links with only one coach —PC-XT+ 21:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:St. Bonaventure Bonnies men's soccer coach navbox[edit]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 03:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Weak delete (or userfy) as premature until another article is established; probably the easiest one of these to save given only one of several choices is needed —PC-XT+ 21:27, 25 July 2016 (UTC) 21:29, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Human sexuality[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was no consensus. This appears to be an attempt at forum shopping after the RM was unsuccessful, and I encourage the nominator to either provide a more compelling rationale for merging/renaming/changing this template or drop the stick. ~ Rob13Talk 01:07, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

To be merged with {{Sex}}. ~ Sharif uddin (talk) 10:11, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Pinging Flyer22 Reborn, Johnuniq, NeilN, Zad68, Grayfell, Cullen328 and Nigelj and for their input. Sharif uddin (talk) 10:16, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
  • This appears to be an attempt to rewrite history. A hard-to-follow rename request at Template talk:Sex#Rename was closed as "no consensus" by Jenks24 on 5 July 2016. There is no clear rationale for a change, and indeed it's not clear what the proposal is. However, only Sharif uddin supports a change. Johnuniq (talk) 10:23, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pro forma Oppose as no reason for the merge has been given. --NeilN talk to me 13:34, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

July 10[edit]

Template:San Diego freeways[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 02:19, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Better suited by a category. Also see similar discussions for DC, Philadelphia, and San Antonio. Rschen7754 21:46, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete—per nom and past precedents. Imzadi 1979  23:24, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:PD-USGov-DOE-ANL[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 02:18, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 July 10#File:Argonnelablogo.PNG. Stefan2 (talk) 21:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete - Invalid license template. License terms disallow third party derivative & commercial use which is a big no-no. -FASTILY 23:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per Fastily. There's limits to how far the PD USGov licensing extends, and this laboratory is not under that umbrella. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Last Comic Standing 1[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was relisted here. ~ Rob13Talk 16:43, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Also nominating Template:Last Comic Standing 2, Template:Last Comic Standing 4 and Template:Last Comic Standing 4: Not everything needs a navbox, and these certainly don't. Launchballer 17:48, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

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

Template:Yeshivas in New Jersey[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was relisted here. ~ Rob13Talk 16:44, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

1. Stated incomplete. 2. Redundant to Category:Orthodox yeshivas in New Jersey, where all but one of the articles (apparently not Orthodox) are already present. Debresser (talk) 12:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep Per Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, the purpose of lists, categories and templates is to work in synergistic fashion; there is no "redundancy" and we are not forced to choose only one or the other. If we depended on all of Wikipedia being complete, we'd have nothing. Alansohn (talk) 14:23, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
As I said below as well, that guideline says clearly that redundancy between templates and categories is used as a deletion argument, and I have seen it countless times here at Tfd and Cfd. Debresser (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Mesivtas[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. The arguments that this template is redundant and would be too large to maintain are strongly based in the guidelines at WP:NAVBOX. ~ Rob13Talk 16:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

There must be literally tens or hundreds of mesivtas worldwide. This template has only one for the whole of Israel, which is laughable. Keeping that in mind: 1. There is no need to have a template for them all. 2. It is not feasible to have a template for them all, because nobody can make a template of all of them, and because it would be too big. 3. It is not fair to have only part of them in a template on Wikipedia. Debresser (talk) 12:10, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Rename, Repurpose and Keep Eliminate the entries outside of the United States and rename it to "Mesivtas in the United States". As only those mesivtas with articles would be listed, this would be an effective navigation tool for a far-more-limited number of schools. Alansohn (talk) 13:53, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
And you think that there is an editor who can do this job, list more or less all mesivtas in the USA? I couldn't. I think it would be better to make a category Category:Mesivtas, and add all the articles to it. That is something I had considered already regardless of this discussion. The template would be redundant to that category. That way it is not a problem if we miss a few, but in a template, that would not be good or fair. Debresser (talk) 14:02, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, the purpose of lists, categories and templates is to work in synergistic fashion to help ensure that appropriate articles are included and created; there is no "redundancy", one is not "better" than the other and we are not forced to choose only one of the options. If we depended on all of Wikipedia being complete, we'd have nothing. Alansohn (talk) 14:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Still, even per that guideline, templates that are basically lists are redundant to categories, and that is a regular outcome of discussions here. But, regardless, do you think it is a good idea to make the category? Debresser (talk) 14:42, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm 100% supportive of creating a category to work in parallel with the template. Alansohn (talk) 14:56, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Comment Now that the category was created, and all articles from the template added to it, the additional argument of redundancy is added to the original proposal. Alansohn has expressed his point of view that he doesn't see that as an argument, but I do, based on practice I have seen for years here at Tfd and the guideline mentioned above. Debresser (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete, there are probably hundreds of mesivtas. Do we really need a template listing all and maintaining the template as well? Having a category is good enough. Maybe, just maybe, a template for a localized region would make sense but a global template is not a good idea. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:48, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
    • No policy requires categories, lists or templates to be complete and to delete them if not; the best way to build them is one article at a time and to allow the alternative methods to co-exist synergistically. Do we need this template? No. Nor do we "need" anything on Wikipedia. Let's just blow up the whole encyclopedia and no one will have to maintain anything. Limiting the template to the United States restricts the universe of mesivtas significantly and allows the use of the template as an effective aid to navigation. Alansohn (talk) 20:11, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Being complete is definitely a good thing. But in any case, the argument is more that such a template would be monstrously large. And redundant. Debresser (talk) 20:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
I've taken a look at List of mesivtas, and the management task doesn't appear too daunting. If the list / template gets too large, it's easy enough to break them down into smaller geographical areas to keep them manageable. Can you point me to any policy-based argument that we are forced to choose between a category and a template? Is there is "no need for a template" / "do we really need a template" a valid argument based on some Wikipedia policy or am I missing something? Alansohn (talk) 14:56, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
We don't have to choose, but the 3rd paragraph of Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates does say that there is the option to prefer one over the other. In this case, where IMHO a template is not a good idea - including that I think that breaking them up in small templates is also not a good idea, I'd prefer to have the category replace the template, rather than have them coexist. Debresser (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
By the way, there is no inherent reason to restrict this template to the USA. In view of WP:GLOBAL, I do not think that is a good idea. Debresser (talk) 15:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Take a look at Category:United States shopping mall templates, which lists 94 different templates for what appears to be every state in the United States and a few dozen for various cities and metropolitan areas. Take a look at Template:Shopping malls in California, which lists several dozen malls in that one state. There are orders of magnitude more shopping malls than mesivtas, and we don't have a demand that they all be put on one global template nor would anyone ever insist that it is impossible to split them up into sub-templates at various levels. This is how templates work, and insisting that this template should be deleted merely because you have decided that "[you] do not think that is a good idea" seems to accomplish nothing.
I think you mean to refer to WP:WORLDVIEW (rather than WP:GLOBAL, but the absence of Template:Shopping malls in Zimbabwe (while Category:Shopping malls in Zimbabwe exists) doesn't mandate deletion of all other shopping mall templates. For that matter, List of shopping malls in Zimbabwe has a number of red-linked articles for malls and a continent-wide template for lists of shopping malls in Africa.
WP:CLN does in fact specify that there are some limited circumstances where one choice is better than the others, but there is policy to back up those explicit exceptions.
Given that I and other editors are more than willing to maintain templates at various levels along with the associated articles, why should we delete this merely based on WP:IDONTLIKEIT? Alansohn (talk) 20:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
But there isn't (to the best of my knowledge) a template for Shopping Malls in the US, it's always by State or region. That can be done for Mesivtas I would imagine, but having it worldwide is the issue. I wouldn't have a problem with a template on a much smaller level, like Mesivtas in the US or Mesivtas in NY, etc. Sir Joseph (talk) 20:28, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:KP QWP & others[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was relisted here. ~ Rob13Talk 00:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Does not seem to be a reason to put the number in a template rather than just directly in the single article in which it is used. WOSlinker (talk) 09:33, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

  • The templates are for use in the political party's article, plus the article for the legislative body. Except for "PakSen JIP" (which was previously created for Senate of Pakistan, these other templates are new and have only been applied to the party-specific articles. Eventually, I will add them to the articles for their corresponding assemblies, where they can also be used for calculated values for the size of ruling & opposition coalitions, as well as a count of total vacant seats. The objective is to reduce editing time, page histories, and errors. Farolif (talk) 15:58, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
    • If they are kept, then each of them could do with some documentation stating what the figure represents, as at the moment, it's not very clear. -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Apex Online Racing[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Undeletion may be possible in the future if more articles are created. ~ Rob13Talk 02:15, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Navbox just consists of redlinks, so is not very useful. WOSlinker (talk) 09:27, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Wait until the articles have been completed, you'll find their drafts here. Holdenman05 (talk) 05:34, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
The template should be drafted along with the articles, at least until there are more than 2 blue links, but they do seem to be on the way, so maybe it doesn't matter too much... —PC-XT+ 05:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Hungary squad 1997 FIFA World Youth Championship[edit]

More of the same; there's multiple instances of consensus against these youth navboxes. See here for the latest. ~ Rob13Talk 03:44, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Template:Corruption in India[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete, but this may need significant changes to be useful. ~ Rob13Talk 02:13, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I'm going to give this another try, because nothing has changed since the previous nomination. You might wonder at this nomination, because it seems at first to be an entirely reasonable topic. However, if you dig a little deeper, you find that a) the main article covers little or none of the subjects in the template, b) the list of scandals and involved individuals is incredibly arbitrary and ad hoc, with no systematic inclusion criteria, and c) the creator and the other major editor have both been indeffed for socking, which strongly suggests that maintaining NPOV was not the highest priority of the folks who created this. Also see WP:TNT; this might be a legitimate topic, but if we need a navbox about it, we need to start over. Vanamonde93 (talk) 14:12, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep The Template created in 2011 has been edited by multiple editors here not just two and if there is any issue that can be dealt with through normal editing.This is very valid topic.Further if there were any issue with the inclusion criteria or any other issue with the template this could have been raised in the Talk Page of the Template.But None have been raised in over 5 Years even once.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:04, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Pharaoh of the Wizards, ordinarily, I would agree with you. I do not lightly nominate this for deletion. Yet I spent quite a while figuring out how to make this a reasonable set of links, and come up with nothing. The set of scams is entirely arbitrary, as is the list of people, and the miscellaneous links. The "legislation" section is the only one that makes any sense. Do you have any suggestions? Vanamonde93 (talk) 06:00, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
I would suggest deleting all entries in "Scandals" section and only keep List of scandals in India maybe somewhere in footer. From "Anti-corruption activism" I suggest deleting all biographies and keep only articles related to movements/groups etc. Rest whole template seems okay to me. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your message .What to add and remove is a content issue ,Anyone can make any change in the template with a Edit summary and talk page message if it is major change.But as other editors are also involved it is better it be the talk page of the template Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As per the above, this discussion hasn't reached a conclusion with regard to what this template, if kept, should be.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 03:32, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

July 9[edit]

Template:Basketball Fans[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 05:36, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Although I'm not familiar with how Templates work on Wikipedia this doesn't seem particular notable. I was unable to find similar templates for football, baseball, or soccer though I might have been looking in the wrong place. I'm not sure I see the utility in this template. SQGibbon (talk) 22:46, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete. Doesn't seem like a notable or important distinction, besides the assertion would have to be mentioned & sourced within every single biographical article it is appended to...seems mostly like a bit of trivia. Shearonink (talk) 07:25, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Tailchaser's Song[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 05:37, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

This template is populated by redlinks and redirects. Other than a single character article I also just nominated for deletion, only the main work uses the template. There is very little chance of it actually being populated by articles. TTN (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete Agree. I think I created most of the articles for the template and the template itself originally years ago, but at the time did not understand how the other articles failed notability. I had actually been considering proposing the remaining article and this template for deletion myself. Nat2 (talk) 00:25, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
As of now, the other character page has been deleted, and this template serves effectively no purpose. Nat2 (talk) 02:28, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Speed (film series)[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 16:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Given that two of the links are redirects to the film articles, this is a completely unnecessary template for 2 films and one notable character. (The 4th link is to an episode that spoofs the films, but that's it). And as there's no indication of any further sequels in the work, there's no real point for this template. MASEM (t) 17:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete Besides the two film links and redirects there are only two other links in the template, both of which are linked in context from the two film articles. The template is completely superfluous. Betty Logan (talk) 19:56, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete Not enough links....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:59, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Infobox KHL team[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was merge. ~ Rob13Talk 16:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

not much in the KHL team template that's not already in the generic hockey team template. so, no real reason for keeping a second infobox template. just merge them. Frietjes (talk) 21:51, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ RobTalk 21:58, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob13Talk 06:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Merge to consolidate, though I'll drop a note at the Ice Hockey WikiProject for more input... —PC-XT+ 20:28, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:EaglesEdBlock[edit]

This is a "role model" award. It's very unlikely that anyone would want to navigate between these players on the basis of winning this award. Fails #3 and #5 of WP:NAVBOX, at the very least. ~ Rob13Talk 01:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete even though I might use this, it isn't one of the most defining things about being a player, and I'm afraid keeping would contribute to navbox creep —PC-XT+ 06:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete unlikely to be used for navigation. Lizard (talk) 03:08, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per PC-XT's reasoning. Additionally, this certainly meets the criteria set forth under disadventages, specifically #3 and #4. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 22:25, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Completed discussions[edit]

The contents of this section are transcluded from Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell (edit)

If process guidelines are met, move templates to the appropriate subsection here to prepare to delete. Before deleting a template, ensure that it is not in use on any pages (other than talk pages where eliminating the link would change the meaning of a prior discussion), by checking Special:Whatlinkshere for '(transclusion)'. Consider placing {{Being deleted}} on the template page.

Closing discussions[edit]

The closing procedures are outlined at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Administrator instructions.

To review[edit]

Templates for which each transclusion requires individual attention and analysis before the template is deleted.

To merge[edit]

Templates to be merged into another template.

Arts[edit]

Geography, politics and governance[edit]

Religion[edit]

Sports[edit]

Transport[edit]

Other[edit]

Meta[edit]

Replace \{\{other people2 ?\|(?:.*?\{\{!}})(.*?)}} with {{other people||$1}}
Unless I missed something, this should catch just about everything (piped and non-piped), and put it as the DAB link whilst saving the original message (i.e. no extra text, links, or wording). Now, this does end up putting things like "Alan Garner (disambiguation)" into the second link, but that might just mean a second run removing one of the pipes. Primefac (talk) 03:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • @Primefac: A few comments:
    1. You'll need to escape the right curly brackets as well.
    2. It's always a best practice to use \s* frequently for templates to pick up all forms of white space. For instance, some editors include newlines between each parameter or multiple spaces and you need the greedy regex to pick that up.
    3. As written, the regex would take a page that was named "Bob Smith (disambiguation)" but displayed as "Bob Smith" and send them to the actual page named "Bob Smith".
    4. Your regex didn't consider redirects.
I haven't tested this, but I think the following regex is closer to what you'll want.
\{\{\s*other ?(?:people|persons) ?2\s*\|\s*((?:[^\{\}]*\{\{\!\}\})?[^\{\}]*)\}\} with {{other people||$1}}
As far as running the bot, I could do it or you could. An AWB bot is literally as simple as downloading AWB, filing a WP:BRFA, and then checking the auto-save box that pops up in AWB after your account is flagged as an AWB bot. It's not at all complicated. If it required any coding ability, I wouldn't be able to do it myself. ~ Rob13Talk 03:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Are we over-thinking this? To keep the text as "For other people with the same name" the {{{1}}} param of {{other people2}} just becomes {{{2}}} of {{other people}}. So... just replace the 2 with a | and it would work. {{!}} has valid use in OP so it shouldn't affect the display. Primefac (talk) 04:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
That would involve similar regex: \{\{\s*other ?(?:people|persons) ?2\s*\| to {{other people||. There needs to be at least a search for the template name and the following pipe to ensure other templates aren't accidentally affected. I'm not familiar with the underlying templates, but it does appear this would be simpler and accomplish the same thing. ~ Rob13Talk 04:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
No regex needed; AWB has a template replace tool, so swap OP2 (and its redirects) and use a simple "find 'other people' and replace with 'other people |'" rule afterwards. Primefac (talk) 05:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
@BU Rob13 and Primefac: I've replaced the guts of {{other people2}} with {{other people||{{{1}}}}} and filed a BRFA for template substitution at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/NihiltresBot 2. {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 15:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

To convert[edit]

Templates for which the consensus is that they ought to be converted to categories, lists or portals are put here until the conversion is completed.

That sounds like a good place to hold the conversation. Primefac (talk) 05:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Category:Toei Animation television has been created/populated with the shows found in that section. Primefac (talk) 04:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

To substitute[edit]

Templates for which the consensus is that all instances should be substituted (i.e. the template should be merged with the article) are put here until the substitutions are completed. After this is done, the template is deleted from template space.

  • None currently

To orphan[edit]

These templates are to be deleted, but may still be in use on some pages. Somebody (it doesn't need to be an administrator, anyone can do it) should fix and/or remove significant usages from pages so that the templates can be deleted. Note that simple references to them from Talk: pages should not be removed. Add on bottom and remove from top of list (oldest is on top).

Ready for deletion[edit]

Templates for which consensus to delete has been reached, and for which orphaning has been completed, can be listed here for an administrator to delete. Remove from this list when an item has been deleted. If these are to be candidates for speedy deletion, please give a specific reason. See also {{Deleted template}}, an option to delete templates while retaining them for displaying old page revisions.


Archive and Indices[edit]