Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 August 12

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

August 12[edit]

Template:Draft at[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The result of the discussion was Withdrawn. Thanks JJMC89 for pointing out the real purpose of this template. I was too quick in doing this nomination and only looked at transclsuions, which the editnotice use doesn't generate. I will still move the three uses of the template on redirects to {{R with possibilities}} since it's not how the template is supposed to be used. (non-admin closure) --Trialpears (talk) 18:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Template for placing a link to a draft on a redirect page. This should be handled using {{R with possibilities}} draft feature. Where drafts with the same name are linked. After adding support for drafts at another location all 4 transclusions could be converted and this template redirected or deleted. See Template talk:Draft at for some semi-relevant discussion. --Trialpears (talk) 23:57, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Keep – There is a reason this template was created, and that is because {{R with possibilities}} cannot handle Userspace drafts, only Draftspace drafts. Unless and until {{R with possibilities}} is rewritten to also handle Userspace drafts, this template is needed. --IJBall (contribstalk) 23:58, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
    IJBall I intend on rewriting R with possibilities to handle drafts at other locations than Draft:{{PAGENAME}}which will make it work for user space drafts. --Trialpears (talk) 00:04, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
    Great! Once that happens, I'm more than willing to switch to "Delete". Please feel free to drop a diff by my Talk page when you get the revised coding to work. --IJBall (contribstalk) 00:05, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
    Edit request submitted. --Trialpears (talk) 00:24, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep As noted in the documentation, the template is used in the interface and is not for use on redirects. — JJMC89(T·C) 04:14, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep per JJMC89. This template appears in the edit notice of non-existant pages, where it would not be appropriate to use an RCAT template. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE
    ) 16:16, 16 August 2019 (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:COI top[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 redirect. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:33, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Unused templates for archiving COI discussions. Redundant to more general purpose archival templates. --Trialpears (talk) 23:40, 12 August 2019 (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:Articles for Improvement[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. — JJMC89(T·C) 01:09, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Template for process marked historical in 2014. Supposed to go in article space so absolutley no reason for keeping it. --Trialpears (talk) 23:38, 12 August 2019 (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:Browsebarphilippines[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. — JJMC89(T·C) 01:11, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Unused template that is very unlikley to be used since the Philippines portal now uses the standard {{Portals browsebar}}. --Trialpears (talk) 23:35, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

  • delete, not needed. Frietjes (talk) 16:01, 22 August 2019 (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:10years[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 to Template:Navseasoncats. — JJMC89(T·C) 01:12, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Propose merging Template:10years with Template:Navseasoncats.
Proposing merging to {{navseasoncats}} for same reasons as mentioned by @BrownHairedGirl: in her Template:Cat topic in year nomination. Navseasoncats require no parameters making it easier to use and has a lot of customisation options. --Trialpears (talk) 19:18, 12 August 2019 (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).

Module:OldEnglishToIPA[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. czar 10:05, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

This module was previously nominated at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 April 22#Module:OldEnglishToIPA and closed as no consensus. Seems like there's room for improvement on this module and possibly a return to use in the original template. No prejudice against a renomination if it sits unused and/or unedited after a few months.. Well, three months later, the module is still unused and has not been edited since 2017, and so I am nominating it for deletion again. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:51, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Soft delete with possible refund. --Trialpears (talk) 17:56, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete as before. If someone wants this, move it to user sandbox, but currently, if nothing has changed since last discussion, the module is not working properly. --Gonnym (talk) 18:05, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete – I have some doubt the template is practical in the first place (see previous TfD), not to mention it doesn't work in its current form. If the creator wants to keep it, move it under Module:Sandbox/. Nardog (talk) 18:16, 12 August 2019 (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:Progress[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:30, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Unused (three talk page messages talking about the template and a few ancient user subpages using it) and redundant to {{Progress bar}}/{{Progression}}/{{Progress meter}}. --Trialpears (talk) 12:47, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:26, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete as unused and as redundant to other templates. --Gonnym (talk) 18:07, 12 August 2019 (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 awards list[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 to Template:Infobox awards list. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Propose merging Template:Infobox awards list with Template:Infobox musician awards.
These templates are set out almost identically; the only reason I can see to have the "musician awards" separate is because of the custom awards names, but those can easily be merged/combined. The templates' "custom" templates are nearly identical as well. Primefac (talk) 13:15, 12 August 2019 (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).

Reading Railroad s-line templates[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

s-line data modules

{{s-line}} templates for the Reading Company. Superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Reading Company. All transclusions replaced. There are 30 dependent s-line data modules which should also be deleted. Mackensen (talk) 00:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Delete per past consensus to migrate to adjacent stations module. BLAIXX 10:35, 12 August 2019 (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).