Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 December 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 3 December 5 >

December 4[edit]

Template:Cross-wiki user[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was move to userspace. No prejudice against merging its functionality into an existing template if so desired (and consensus supports it). Primefac (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Used by only a single user on personal user pages. Izno (talk) 00:08, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • This template provides userspace links across wikiprojects, in the same way that {{sister project}} does so for articles. It's hasn't really been advertised, but there really isn't an appropriate substitute for this functionality. I'd be thrilled if we had an all-encompassing cross-wiki linking template that would recognize the different links for articles, user pages, template pages, etc. but until that time, these templates should be left available for users to get access across Wikimedia sister projects. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 02:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:20, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as serving a useful function, well within our userspace template tolerances – unless there's a better/easier way of doing the same thing. This could, however, move to User:UBX/Userboxes/Wikipedia/Cross-wiki user, then be listed at User:UBX/Userboxes/Wikipedia. We alreay migrated a large number of userboxes out of the Template namespace years ago and should do more of them.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:23, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to some other template in Category:Wikimedia account user templates. This appears to be redundant with pre-existing userboxes, at least in purpose if not exact feature-set.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:26, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @SMcCandlish: I think you misunderstand the purpose then. This is not a userbox for advertising a person's cross-wiki activities, and does not really function as such. It is a tool for userpages so that editors can have access to their main links on sister projects, much like other cross-wiki templates provide links to sister project content in other namespaces. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 06:13, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The only functional difference I can see between this and several templates already in that category is that this one provides talk, contribs, uploads, and watchlist links, which are features that can be added to a pre-existing template as parameters. Several of those other templates are also redundant and can merge away.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:39, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I would be happy to relist this along with other templates you think are at least partially redundant to see what sort of merger we could accomplish. I originally made this template because I couldn't find anything to accomplish the task, so if that functionality is already present elsewhere, it should be merged, and we should be doing better at categorizing and linking those templates so that others can find them. VanIsaac, MPLL contWpWS 09:09, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Without looking in subcategories, every template in that category appears to be redundant. A combined one could, with no parameters produce output like {{User SUL}}; with just a username, {{User unified}} or {{User global}}; with a username and a parameter for what one's "home" wiki and/or language are, the output of {{User SUL Box}} (which also renders the German-hardcoded {{User SUL-de}} and the fewer-options {{User SUL-bar}} completely pointless). I would suggest starting with {{User SUL Box}} which has the richest options, and adding parameters to display talk, contribs, etc. links when a "home" wiki is specified.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:48, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mainly looking for more opinions on merge v. delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 08:38, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:45, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move to a subpage of "User:Vanisaac" since this is only used by one user, and is only used in userspace. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:52, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • move to userspace. Frietjes (talk) 23:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:rtl-lang and Template:rtl-para[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was keep rtl-para, delete rtl-lang. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:31, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per discussion with Trappist the monk on the Talk page for rtl-lang, I think I'm right in saying that neither of these templates need to exist. Both {{lang}} and {{para}} seem to detect rtl-functionality as a matter of course now; there are a lot of extraneous language templates, and these are two of 'em. Please note I've been unable to properly add a deletion discussion notice to rtl-lang because the page is permanently template-protected; apologies. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 16:19, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: TFD banner added to {{rtl-lang}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:57, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I came here because I use one of these templates on my user page. If they go will there be an alternative? And if so, what is it? Mccapra (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Mccapra: Template:User ar-1 uses {{rtl-lang}}, but other than that I don't see this template on your user page. Anyway, I believe the alternative is to remove either template and things are supposed to work fine without it. If you have counterexamples, this would be a good place to share them. —Anomalocaris (talk) 01:01, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment I’m not suggesting any alternatives, just asking whether these are actually redundant or not. I don’t feel very reassured by “things are supposed to work fine without it.” Do they or don’t they? Mccapra (talk) 08:20, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    {{rtl-lang}} is used in the {{User ar-1}} template on your user page. {{rtl-lang}} can be renamed to {{lang}}; here is the Arabic text and markup from that user box:
    {{rtl-lang}} ← {{rtl-lang}}
    هذا المستخدم يتحدث اللغة العربية بمستوى مبتدئ. ← {{lang}}
    —Trappist the monk (talk) 12:46, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Definitely disagree: I'm not sure if you are able to read any right-to-left text, like Arabic and Hebrew. It is very clear on {{rtl-para}} description and even the example there that it is for longer paragraphs to correctly render text, numbers, which include a left-to-right text, without needing the Right-to-Left unicode mark. I'll give you examples for both templates compared with your suggested alternatives:
-
0 ویکی‌پدیا (به انگلیسی: ‎0 Wikipedia)
- |fa=0 ویکی‌پدیا (به انگلیسی: 0 Wikipedia)
- |0 ویکی‌پدیا (به انگلیسی: 0 Wikipedia)=

- Rtl-para renders long paragraphs, not only from right-to-left, but also aligns them to the right side. It ensures that longer quotes are rendered correctly to be read normally by readers of such languages, to check a source or so.

- With {{rtl-lang}} {{rtl-lang}} English text around
- With {{lang}} 0 ویکی‌پدیا (به انگلیسی: ‎0 Wikipedia) where are the brackets and the numbers?

- Rtl-lang is important to render right-to-left text within the left-to-right text (English), but without breaking the line. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 01:51, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't {{lang-fa|label=none|0 ویکی‌پدیا (به انگلیسی: {{lang|en|2=‎<span title="I added a left-to-right mark">0 Wikipedia</span>}}) }} do that?
Result: With {{lang-fa}} 0 ویکی‌پدیا (به انگلیسی: ‎0 Wikipedia) English text around Gonnym (talk) 07:55, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The documentation there template:Lang#Right-to-left languages is worth checking. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 09:22, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Definitely Keep rtl-para, which is unrelated to para. Probably keep rtl-lang—it may be replaced by lang, but whoever wants to do it must first go over its current transclusions and check whether it's actually as easy as it seems, and it must be done with someone who can read an RTL language. I can, and I'm not certain that it can be done easily. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 05:00, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I should note that I can't read Arabic or Persian; my understanding that these templates are redundant comes from this discussion I had with Trappist the monk, who kindly looked into it for me:
  • "Here are the examples given on the doc page using {{rtl-lang}} along-side the same example using {{lang}}:
  • The romanization of "{{rtl-lang}}" is "al-luġah al-‘arabiyyah".
  • The romanization of "اللغة العربية" is "al-luġah al-‘arabiyyah".
  • The romanization of "{{rtl-lang}}" is "‘Ivrit".
  • The romanization of "עברית" is "‘Ivrit".
  • Kazakh (Қазақ тілі; {{rtl-lang}}) is a Turkic language ...
  • Kazakh (Қазақ тілі; قازاق ڌﻳل) is a Turkic language ...

To me, they look the same. Under the bonnet, there is a minor difference: {{rtl-lang}} includes a trailing &lrm; html entity{{:}}

  • &#123;&#123;[[Template:rtl-lang|rtl-lang]]&#125;&#125;
  • <span title="Arabic-language text"><span lang="ar" dir="rtl">اللغة العربية</span></span>

{{lang}} does not include &lrm; because the <span> tag includes the dir="rtl" attribute which applies to all of the text that the <span>...</span> encloses.

I suspect that this template is an artifact from the time before Module:Lang when {{lang}} could not automatically determine directionality. In the olden days, editors had to add |rtl= to force {{lang}} to add the dir="rtl" attribute and the &lrm; html entity so this template was a sort of typing shorthand. Since {{lang}} does automatically determine directionality, it seems to me that this template can go away."

  • So, my understanding was that {{lang}} encodes this directionality already; you'd think it'd be part and parcel of a language code itself being invoked.----Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 10:55, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe to you, they look the same, but what about my demonstrations? Add punctuation and numbers to it at the end or the beginning to start noticing the mess. To have a decisive say, one needs to be dealing with right-to-left text. It is not enough to take a glimpse and come up with the idea that they look the same. We deal with right-to-left text and we know its issues. The notice under the template needs to be removed immediately. Thanks. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 16:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I have wrapped the TFD notice on rtf-lang with noinclude tags, because I found the above discussion impossible to parse. The downside of this action is that fewer people will be directed to this discussion by the intrusive notices created by the 4,000 transclusions of this template; it may need to be advertised actively on relevant discussion pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:44, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Jonesey95: - apologies if I've messed things up here; this is my first TfD discussion. What pages would you recommend? My thoughts would be Wikiproject languages and accessibility, but I don't know which others to place a notice on.----Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 10:43, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      Nobody messed up anything here; the tags just sometimes make it difficult to interpret what is supposed to be happening. A useful discussion forums might be Template talk:Lang, and and WikiProject talk pages that are connected to a large number of articles that use these templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:39, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep rtl-para, but it looks like rtl-lang is redundant per the discussion above. rtl-para has the useful property of right justification, which is very useful particularly in tables using rtl languages. Fieari (talk) 06:30, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete rtl-lang after replacement with correct lang- template, as the lang- templates already handle that. I'm not clear from this discussion if rtl-para has a replacement so not comment on that. Gonnym (talk) 11:02, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep rtl-para. Has non-replaceable useful functionality, ,as discussed here. Loew Galitz (talk) 02:47, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Nitro[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:56, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused chemical symbol template. Gonnym (talk) 17:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:License change[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:28, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, seems too specific of a case Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 05:02, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this change has occurred on several images from sources that changed their licensing. I think this is mostly a problem on Commons, since most of the free images were moved there. However, considering that sources change licensing, something on Wikipedia for images that are free but not suitable for Commons, seems to be something to have around. What would be the more general case that we have a template for? If there is no more general template, then this could be rewritten to suit that case.-- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 17:35, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: has a clear purpose and it's not unexpected to be frequently unused as many files get moved to Commons or deleted. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 08:23, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 05:29, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:43, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Hungary squad 1958 World Men's Handball Championship[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:44, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, almost all redlinks Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:49, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep it's probably not the best way to do it, but all Hungary squad in main handball competition have such a template. And even though all players are red today, they are all eligible since they played 1958 World Men's Handball Championship. Consequently, my opinion is that deleting this template is not very appropriate. --LeFnake (talk) 15:01, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't work that way as we don't keep templates just because the articles will be created. A navbox needs a minimum of five links. This doesn't meet the criteria under NENAN. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:30, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 05:32, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Not enough links....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:45, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:43, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Only one blue link -> no navigation. The sole keep argument is an unpersuasive OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Cfr3[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Further discussion should perhaps take place to extending cfr2 to support a multi-nomination case, which I would encourage participants to take up at Template talk:Cfr2 or possibly WT:CFD. Izno (talk) 05:05, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. By the way, Did Q28 make a mess today? 03:49, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment and leaning delete - I'd like to know what Cfr3 brings that is missing from Template:Cfr2? The lack of documentation and Twinkle support makes me doubt its usefulness. Gonnym (talk) 22:00, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 05:40, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment CFR3 is used in multi category nominations. CFR2 is for one category nominations, as it does not support more than one category being renamed. Ideally, CFR2 should be modified so that CFR3 can be placed into CFR2's syntax, as a list= parameter that takes a set of {{subst:cfr3}}'s. CFR2 also needs a header= parameter to produce a unified header name appropriate for multicategory nominations. (CFR1 already supports specifying the target header) -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 05:49, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm looking at the code but I don't see how CfR3 supports multi category nominations. The code is:
* [[:Category:{{{1}}}|Category:{{{1}}}]] to [[:Category:{{{2}}}|Category:{{{2}}}]] {{{text}}} - that's the entire code. Do you mean it supports multi nominations by the fact that you can use that template multiple times? If so, then just copy the output of Cfr2 without the rational part. BTW, {{Cfr2}} does have a |header= parameter. Gonnym (talk) 10:28, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:42, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the user would place multiple copies of the template, one for each additional nominated category. As I noted, it should be integrated into CFR2, with a {{{list}}} parameter that lets you place a bunch of CFR3's to be substed in between the first CFR2 category and the rationale portion of CFR2. Copying CFR2's output would defeat uniform produced text, esp. if someone fouls up the formatting, and wouldn't give a one-pass save. -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 05:13, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Singaporean name[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:27, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand there is some dispute over X name hatnotes as a whole, this one is specifically problematic within them, as it does not reflect an actual name format. A previous discussion of this template here covered some of the general issues, but not the specific issues that this template brings. The core issue is that there is no "Singaporean name". Singapore is officially multiethnic and multicultural, and different cultural groups have different common ways in which their names are written. For example, some, especially from Malay or Indian/Tamil backgrounds, commonly have patronymic names. Many of Chinese backgrounds have last name-first name structures. Even that is not ubiquitous, with some having English first names which are used in a standard English first name-last name structure. There is no common link between these naming structures, and use depends on the individual.
An average reader will not have such background knowledge about Singaporean demographics. When encountering this template, one reader may see "In this Singaporean name, there is no family name", another may see "In this Singaporean name, the family name is X". To those who do not understand the background, the template is actively misleading, giving the impression that there is a common Singaporean name format of some kind, and that whichever format they are looking at (Patronymic, Last name first, or First name first) is the Singaporean name format. To those who do understand the background, the template has no meaning as the name has nothing to do with being Singaporean (and one assumes any connection to Singapore is going to be present in the actual article). Thus, the template brings no benefit to understanding while potentially misleading casual readers. CMD (talk) 11:29, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can the 4 current usages be replaced with {{Family name hatnote}}? Gonnym (talk) 12:51, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: Not within the current parameters documented, but I suspect it could be integrated. I am unfamiliar with why the Family name hatnote template is different from say Template:Malay name, Template:efn Chinese name, and Template:Indian patronymic. CMD (talk) 10:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The family name template was a result of slowly merging specific types of templates to make sure nothing breaks. @Primefac might know why the other 2 (not the efn one, as that ins't a hatnote) weren't merged. Gonnym (talk) 11:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The names involving patronymics haven't been worked into the templating system yet, mainly due to differences in wording. They're on my list of future mergers. Primefac (talk) 11:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In that case the current usage of this template is redundant to Family name and the Malay and Indian templates mentioned (and presumably a patronymic inclusion would merge those three too). CMD (talk) 09:47, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Replace with it family name if needed. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:16, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Indonesia is multi-ethnic and multicultural as well, yet there exists an "Indonesian name" template as well. Gandalfett (talk) 21:17, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:41, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:40, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. {{family name hatnote}} can be used directly if needed, and produces the less misleading In this article, the family name is [...], which does not imply anything about a consistent name format. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Tunisia squad 2021 FIFA Arab Cup[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:55, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Long established consensus on WP:FOOTY and per the outcomes of previous TfD discussions (example here, here, here, here, here, here and here), international squad navigational boxes should only exist for the senior men and women's: World Cup, Confederations Cup, Olympics and each continent's top level competition. Neither of these templates are for such a competition, and therefore should be deleted. The squad is already listed at 2021 FIFA Arab Cup squads#Tunisia. S.A. Julio (talk) 15:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 15:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete We don't need templates for every team that participates in tournaments. Cruft and NEAN applies here. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:43, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per consensus and precedent. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 18:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 18:39, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Nehme1499 21:54, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Sakiv (talk) 08:22, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this is an official FIFA tournament with senior A national team squads. Just because some teams are missing players does not mean it's not a senior national team tournament. TonyStarks (talk) 15:16, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Rail-interchange/doc/OMSI[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 19:10, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

nothing but script errors. could probably be deleted per this discussion. 98.230.196.188 (talk) 15:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Hindu calendar purnimanta masa[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:47, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

does nothing. 98.230.196.188 (talk) 15:50, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:WikiProject Ohio/sandbox/hide and related /hide template subpages[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:53, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and unusable. Wikiproject /hide subpage feature was deleted in 2009. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:56, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Calendar date JavaScript subtemplates[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 01:01, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused JavaScript pages.[1][2] As per GreenC's comment here, the data in Template:Calendar date/holidays/Yom HaShoah.js is now located at Module:Calendar date/localfiles/Yom HaShoah, and Template:Calendar date/holidays/Hanukkah-test.js was a test page. As these are not in use, ideally they should be deleted, but if they are kept they should be fully protected for security purposes in case anyone decides to try and install them as user scripts. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 13:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These should be speedily but I don't know how for .js -- GreenC 15:30, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Too many boxes[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:24, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Failed attempt, actually he didn't use. Q28 hope you pay attention to TFD 05:06, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Not sure what the OP meant to say, but there doesn't seem to be a rationale for deletion. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the rationale for deletion is that the template is unused (which Q28 didn't state clearly). * Pppery * it has begun... 19:48, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's a cleanup template. That the template is currently unused is a good thing, not a rationale for deletion. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:51, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment When was this template last used on an article? --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:13, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:11, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Since my question the template isn't being used as of my vote on any articles. Thus, many articles no longer have this issue of too many infoboxes. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:50, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete on the merits of the template, not just unused. This is just one of those too-specific kind of amboxes better served by a talk page message or bold action to start the wiki process. --Izno (talk) 15:39, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Cmbox/styles.css[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:25, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At least in my opinion, it has not yet been used. Q28 hope you pay attention to TFD 04:34, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:09, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Izno (talk) 15:39, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:A redirect[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:15, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicates existing templates Whiteguru (talk) 08:11, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Whiteguru: Kindly send me that existing template link, thanks.— Sojol Rana Talk 08:21, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See here. Gonnym (talk) 09:31, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The link you provided is only shows text, but A redirect template shows with svg vector. We often use this template on Bengali Wikipedia when we completely move an article to the new title like this. I think we should change the text from This is a redirect page. to This is a moved page., that's will be better. — Sojol Rana Talk 19:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sojol Rana:Templates are used for specific purposes. You were directed to a page which has specific templates, and five different guides to using templates. Did you examine these for your solution? Did you examine the guide to redirection on Mediawiki? --Whiteguru (talk) 20:17, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This templates offers nothing and there are much better alternatives. Gonnym (talk) 09:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unnecessarily redundant while offering no additional information. Literally any of the templates at Category:Redirect templates would be a preferable option. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 19:36, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Navbox/old[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:14, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I found that the template seems to be no longer in use. Q28 (talk) 08:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, no need for a copy to be made of the page history. User:GKFXtalk 21:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Transwiki to a Mediawiki template coding repository, and Templates.wikia -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 05:18, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, was useful for testing during conversion to LUA, but no longer needed. Frietjes (talk) 22:27, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Userbox Wikimania 2020[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted by BD2412 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:05, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not used. Eventually, the party was held online, so the template was no longer needed. Q28 (talk) 07:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy deleted. BD2412 T 07:56, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
     BD2412: But I don't know what quick delete rule it falls under.--Q28 (talk) 08:05, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Most traded currencies/RefTag[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:13, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's completely useless. And is now unused. Q28 (talk) 07:49, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused Infobox road/link templates[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:24, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All of these templates have no transclusions. They were orphaned after updates to Lua modules that replaced this set of templates. See this User talk page discussion for details. Pinging @Rschen7754, TwinsMetsFan, Imzadi1979, Pheonixter, Fredddie, Dr. Lurk, Plastikspork, TapticInfo, Mxn, Roqz, WOSlinker, Kotola001, Y4n, and BasilLeaf:, the creators of these templates, in lieu of talk page notification, since this should not be controversial if my understanding of the situation is correct. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:24, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95:, if these transclusions were orphaned, then I don’t object to deleting them. TapticInfo (talk) 20:25, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't know what to do here, so I defer to my mentors (Rschen7754 (talk · contribs), Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) and Fredddie (talk · contribs), among others, in the topic of roads to decide what to do with Template:Infobox road/link/CRI (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages). As always, thanks a lot for the help with CRI roads. :) --Roqz (talk) 22:30, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. These should have been deleted in 2013 when Template:Infobox road/abbrev/AUT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) and the like were deleted. –Fredddie™ 03:00, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Userbox Wikimania 2025[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was Wrong venue Moved to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Userbox Wikimania 2025 (non-admin closure) * Pppery * it has begun... 01:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not necessary. It created it too early. Q28 (talk) 04:34, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • No objection to deletion. Given the events of the past two years, it was overly optimistic to assume that Wikimanias would continue into perpetuity without a hitch. BD2412 T 04:54, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Wiktko and related templates[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. The other templates can be nominated separately. ✗plicit 05:11, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The template is not currently in use,. Q28 (talk) 04:25, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: These templates appear to be redundant to simple invocations of {{Wikt-lang}}. That is not necessarily a reason to delete them, but if they were more convenient and needed, they would probably have been used by now. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:31, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    All the Wikt- templates could easily be replaced with {{Wikt-lang}}. See for example:
    So I would support a wider TfD which replaces all usages with one template. Gonnym (talk) 09:41, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:You've already been adopted[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:09, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This template is no longer used. Q28 (talk) 04:20, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Ya/bgcolor[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:09, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The template is no longer in use, at least in my opinion. Q28 (talk) 04:18, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:WikiProject Lego/old[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:09, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, it is not using. Q28 (talk) 04:13, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:WikiProject Retailing/old[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:52, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No longer in use.,, Q28 (talk) 04:13, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RussiaBasicLawRef/ast/astrakhan/oldrev01[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:06, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused.,, Q28 (talk) 04:04, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RussiaAdmMunRef/ta/admlist/oldrev01[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:06, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused.,, Q28 (talk) 04:04, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RussiaAdmMunRef/mos/munlist/podolsk/oldrev01[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:07, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused.,, Q28 (talk) 04:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RussiaBasicLawRef/kda/anapa/oldrev01[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:07, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused.,, Q28 (talk) 04:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RussiaBasicLawRef/kda/krasnodar/oldrev01[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:07, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused.,, Q28 (talk) 04:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Jingle All the Way[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:07, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of a stretch to create a navbox for a film "series" that only has 2 films in it. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 03:58, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RussiaAdmMunRef/mos/munlist/korolyov/oldrev01[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:07, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused,., Q28 (talk) 03:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RussiaAdmMunRef/kos/admlist/oldrev01[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:08, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused,., Q28 (talk) 03:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RussiaAdmMunRef/mos/munlist/balashikha/oldrev01[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:08, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused,., Q28 (talk) 03:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:RussiaAdmMunRef/niz/admlist/oldrev03[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 05:08, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused,., Q28 (talk) 03:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_December_4&oldid=1067074425"