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.
"WP:TDF" redirects here. For the WikiProject Cycling run Tour de France taskforce, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling/Tour de France task force.
Not to be confused with Wikipedia:List of discussion templates.
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

Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

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]

Shortcut:
  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 nominated is inline, do not add a newline between the Tfd notice and the code of the template.
  • 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]].
  • Before saving your edit, preview your edit to ensure the Tfd message is displayed properly.

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 make any interested WikiProjects aware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not use Article alerts.

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]

December 15[edit]

Template:NPSL Team Infobox[edit]

This should be replaced with just {{Infobox football club}}. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox EN Standard Details[edit]

Not really sure what this is for but not really an infobox... Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:KL-RTS Route RapidKL Infobox[edit]

Unused template. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:03, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Lan Xang Monarchs Infobox[edit]

If anything this should be a navbox... Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of SxG 10[edit]

Template contains one entry. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox former country[edit]

Propose merging Template:Infobox former country with Template:Infobox country.
Both of these templates need to be converted to use Template:Infobox... I would like to propose that as part of that conversion (which I am happy to do) they should also be merged. A former country just has a couple extra parameters that a current country doesn't have. No need to have them as separate templates. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:12, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I second this notion. --Vami_IV✠ 01:29, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Support - 'former country' is a subset of country anyway; it should help new editors of articles on former countries become aware of available parameters that may be useful. SamWilson989 (talk) 04:21, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Note: @SamWilson989 and Vami IV: one thing to also consider is whether country can just be merged into {{Infobox settlement}}.... --Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:49, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
I'd disagree with that change. There are clear differences in usage between settlement and country/former country. The whole idea of the infobox is to summarise an idea, an event, or a place at a quick glance. The country and former country infoboxes are indistinguishable, whereas this isn't the case with the settlement infobox, and so merging them would simply cause confusion with the millions who have seen these infoboxes in use for some time. SamWilson989 (talk) 09:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

December 14[edit]

Template:TaxonIds[edit]

Per the discussion at Template talk:TaxonIds, this template is redundant to {{taxonbar}}, and in many cases, both are being employed on the same page. To fix the duplication, I suggest we replace {{taxonIds}} with {{taxonbar}}. Of course, I don't suggest deleting this template until the migration is complete. Frietjes (talk) 22:33, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:1943 college football independents records[edit]

Unused template. GXXF T • C 19:36, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Nachtstuck Records[edit]

This is *not* a template. This looks like an article. I don't see anything worth keeping it it. Naraht (talk) 16:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Vietnam-tv-actor-stub[edit]

This is a redundant template. The purpose of this is served by Template:Vietnam-tv-bio-stub and in any case, it doesn't seem to be used. Lemongirl942 (talk) 10:51, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Tamil name[edit]

Not a working template. Not sure what this was supposed to do... Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 07:25, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox shinty league[edit]

Not a working template Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 07:25, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox storm small[edit]

Propose merging Template:Infobox storm small with Template:Infobox storm.
There is no reason for a 2nd template Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 07:11, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox SMAS[edit]

Template is not used. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

December 13[edit]

Template:Greek myth (chthonic olympian)[edit]

unused Frietjes (talk) 23:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Sports Games Vietnam[edit]

redundant to {{infobox country at games}} Frietjes (talk) 17:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Speedy delete It's unused, and not going to be used. Every similar template has already been merged/deleted, with this one "escaping" only because it wasn't calling one of the now-deleted meta templates. Primefac (talk) 18:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Olympics Refugees[edit]

redundant to {{infobox country at games}} Frietjes (talk) 17:17, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Speedy delete It's unused, and not going to be used. As mentioned, every similar template has already been merged. Primefac (talk) 18:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Olympics Independents[edit]

replaced by {{infobox country at games}} Frietjes (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Speedy delete It's unused, and not going to be used. As mentioned, every similar template has already been merged. Primefac (talk) 18:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:List of Infobox Olympics Templates[edit]

pointless now that all of the templates have been deleted Frietjes (talk) 17:15, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Speedy delete per nom. Primefac (talk) 18:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Kahala[edit]

This unused template has been superceded by {{MTY Food Group}}. (The companies apparently merged.) Deli nk (talk) 13:14, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Commons file[edit]

Propose merging Template:Commons file with Template:Commons file inline.
These templates offer almost the same functionality. The only major difference is the text output (one gives a full sentence while the other gives barely more than a link. It should be fairly straightforward to merge these and add an |inline= parameter option.

As an additional note, these two templates are used a combination of only about ten times. I would not be opposed to deleting them both, since there isn't much use and based on the current usage I don't see much more use out of them. Primefac (talk) 12:58, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

No to merging, yes to deletion of {{Commons file}}. The other one is potentially more useful as it may provide images linked directly, through the Media: namespace, with a path to copyright and other info. See WP:PIC#Linking without displaying, paragraphs for images linked directly. I think a search for such use of images in the main namespace is apt. If there is a considerable number of directly-linked images without any attribution, {{Commons file inline}} could be a way to rectify this. 65.88.88.200 (talk) 15:52, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Eddie Fewtrell clubs[edit]

Unpopular template with many entries either non-existent or deleted and unlikely to ever be populated. Only one article remains and its notability is questionable. Ajf773 (talk) 07:18, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

December 12[edit]

Template:Exegesis[edit]

Unused in mainspace, unusable for navigation due to sea of red links, duplicates the scope of Template:Tafsir and an ambiguous title that could refer to any kind of exegsis. --HyperGaruda (talk) 10:00, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Calc[edit]

Unused template - Possibly redundant JMHamo (talk) 01:25, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

  • delete. It does seem redundant. It could and should be replaced with the actual result. If an editor wants to indicate how a figure was derived they should put it in the article, or in a footnote. A template can do the calculations itself, possibly in Lua code which is far more efficient and maintainable, rather than calling this. Unused, so presumably the above has been the case: there has always been a better way to do it.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 02:58, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • delete or turn it into a {{soft redirect}} to the #expr parser function help page. Basically it's functioning as a soft redirect right now. Frietjes (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Christopher Newport Captains football coach navbox[edit]

Only two blue links. Insufficient navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 02:28, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

  • I'd like to request userfication of this navbox so that it can be moved back to the main space at a later date when there are a sufficient number of relevant articles to include. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:23, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
    • @Jweiss11: I have no objection to userfication of any/all of these types of nominations so long as you agree not to move them back into the template namespace until they have at least four blue links, which is the typical cutoff usually applied at TfD. In fact, if you're happy with that outcome, please let me know if you'd be willing for me to move other similar templates (which I had planned to eventually nominate) without the formality of a TfD discussion. ~ Rob13Talk 02:05, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
BU Rob13, I plan to add articles so that all of the other similar nominated navboxes have four blue links. The Christopher Newport navbox is unique among the set in that it could only have two blues link at this point in time, but that will change in the future. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:09, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • @Plastikspork: Tad confused by this relist. Everyone who's commented agrees with userfying the template. Any particular reason we didn't just do that? ~ Rob13Talk 00:26, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
    • Since the original author is Patriarca12, I thought I would provide more time for comment. Does it go to Patriarca12's namespace or Jweiss11's namespace? Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 12:34, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
      • The only request for userfication was by Jweiss11, so it presumably goes there. ~ Rob13Talk 17:04, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Acc[edit]

Unused template. GXXF T • C 16:27, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Conditional Keep This template is designed to be subst'd. Keep unless someone from the Wikipedia:Request an account team says they don't need it anymore. — xaosflux Talk 17:04, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Once Upon a Time ratings[edit]

Way too cramped, not suitable for fall shows. Alex|The|Whovian? 00:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep No reason why shows with 16-20 or less episodes per season are allowed to use this template, while shows with 22-23 epsisodes are not. Seems like Template:Television ratings graph should be modified slightly (ex. allow custom labels for season names in table to remove Season for each row and reduce width of bars in graph) so that all shows can use it or maybe a new template should be created specifically for shows with 20+ episodes per season. The ratings template is an excellent template and it doesn't make sense that because a particular show has 2-3 more episodes per season they cannot use it given that the problems of it being cramped can be addressed. - Brojam (talk) 01:54, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:ME-fact[edit]

Useless topic-specific version of "citation needed" template. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 04:30, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:54, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:07, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:2014UCIWomenTeams[edit]

Outdated template without real use. The riders in the 2014 group are there. That information isn't going to change. There is no reason to have a template (even if used on multiple pages) to convey information that is completely static. The Banner talk 23:03, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Keep
  1. Template used at four places 2014 in women's road cycling , List of 2014 UCI Women's Teams and riders , List of 2014 professional women's cycling teams and UCI Women's Teams
  2. Argument of nominator information isn't going to change: Well 2a) the team names /team seasons links are not written all corect. The names should be changed with the Template:Ct. See for instance edit. 2b) the team links will become at a sudden time a dead link and needs to be adjusted or deleted. 2c, I'm willing to add the number of the season of the teams (1st season/2nd season/8th sesaon).
Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 19:42, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Note See also the note at a related template for dicussion here. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 19:43, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:07, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

December 11[edit]

Template:USnum[edit]

It's a recently created template that's only used on one highly visible page, I suggest it would only be needed if there was a need for mass consistency, and I doubt DC or PR will become states, only needs 2 characters to type "50" than 9 characters to type the template. ∼∼∼∼ Eric0928Talk 23:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete - Per nom. Utterly useless, as it's not something that changes regularly. - BilCat (talk) 10:42, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep per TfD of Template:EUnum, which serves the same purpose.--Prisencolin (talk) 10:47, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
    • Actually, Template:EUnum is used on quite a bit of pages, and the number of EU members has changed 3 times since Wikipedia's foundation, whereas the number of U.S. states has stayed the same since 1959. The EU referendum should subtract one from that, so I can see a need for that template. ∼∼∼∼ Eric0928Talk 18:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
      • The number of US states has been constant for a while now, but on average there has been a new state admitted to the union every four or so years, so a new one is due any time now. On the otherhand, the EU Commission has stated that a new member will likely not be added until 2018, if at all, and the UK will remain in the EU for at least two. Further, because the the number of states has remained constant for a while, in instances of "50 states" being used in articles outnumber the numbers of mentions of 28 member states.--Prisencolin (talk) 01:09, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete - This recently created (Aug. '16) is unnecessary, as the number of U.S. states doesn't change often enough to justify using the template. There have been 50 states for nearly 60 years and there will be 50 states for the foreseeable future. Drdpw (talk) 13:16, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete Pointless. If the US adds a state, it's really not that hard to change the pages --TheSpaceFace Let's Chat 03:51, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Ak icon[edit]

Unused template. GXXF T • C 17:06, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

  • weak keep, part of a series. Frietjes (talk) 16:12, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:19, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Division I Independent ice hockey templates[edit]

Unused templates. ~ Rob13Talk 21:19, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Big Ten ice hockey templates[edit]

Unused templates. ~ Rob13Talk 21:14, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:A-League interim map[edit]

Unused template. GXXF T • C 20:38, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Creator - Not that phased if it goes. I just utilised this while the Newcastle Jets' future was uncertain and they'd gone under a few seasons back. - J man708 (talk) 08:08, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Nobel laureates of India[edit]

Redundant to {{Indian Nobel laureates}}, which was created years ago. ~ Rob13Talk 19:29, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Letters with caron sharp[edit]

Only used on deleted hoax page. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 16:22, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment I agree it should be deleted as it is not used in any significant way. DRMcCreedy (talk) 18:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

2017 Copa Centroamericana templates[edit]

Competition had a format change, there's no longer a Group A or B or a 'Final Stage'. I'm asking for the Group A standings template be to removed (i.e. the redirect), not the template it redirects to. TheBigJagielka (talk) 11:22, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:First recipients of the Knight's Cross[edit]

Template lists personnel of the German Wehrmacht of WWII, who happen to be first recipients of the award. As high-ranking commanders, all of these subjects are also included in the Template:GFMofWWII (template of field marshals), making the template under discussion redundant and not informative.

K.e.coffman (talk) 08:00, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of KG 53[edit]

Template contains one entry K.e.coffman (talk) 07:56, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of the 1st FPD[edit]

Template contains one entry K.e.coffman (talk) 07:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of SG 9[edit]

Template contains one entry K.e.coffman (talk) 07:53, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of the 389th ID[edit]

Insufficient navigation: only two entries K.e.coffman (talk) 07:08, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Current APEC Central Bank Governors[edit]

Verging on WP:CRUFT. No indication that this group of bank governors has received attention as a group. See also [1]. Vanamonde (talk) 07:03, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment This should not be deleted regarding the template APEC's central bank governors as it has a significant purpose and navigational purpose served by this template. Alongside Finance Ministers, the central bank governors represent APEC countries during APEC Summits similar to the G8 and G20. Central bank governors do have a role during APEC finance ministerial meetings Saiph121 (talk) 07:03, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment There is evidence that Central bank governors had a role on APEC summits and are evident as a group in attendance in APEC ministerial meetings and are not a cruft and therefore legitimate as well highly significant. It is highly recommended that these template should be retained and lift off the nomination for deletion immediately. Saiph121 (talk) 04:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete New Zealand incumbents in Cabinet roles and Central Bank Governor change too often for the work needed to keep these templates up to date to be practical. The importance of having this information in a Wikipedia template is extremely low. EvidenceFairy (talk) 06:41, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep and Comment - Importance of this information in this Wikipedia template is absolutely and extremely necessary, important and highly important given to the note of those previous discussions. It is possible to keep these template up to date same as the template of G8 and G20. There is strictly and extremely no need to remove it. Saiph121 (talk) 12:02, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete As I have previously said for the ASEAN templates below, this isn't needed and borders on cruft. The group of Central Bank Governors hasn't received significant coverage as a whole. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:28, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Current APEC Foreign Ministers[edit]

Verging on WP:CRUFT. There is no evidence that this particular subset of foreign ministers is in any way more closely linked than any other, and this international grouping is not one that has received significant attention in WP:RS. Vanamonde (talk) 07:00, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment This should not be strictly deleted as there is a reason that foreign ministers have a purpose in every APEC summit particularly the ministerial meetings. Saiph121 (talk) 07:01, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment Foreign ministers also attended APEC summits and are accompanied APEC heads of states. Mostly they represent heads of states (in absence depending on circumstances). It functions as same in the G8 and G20. Saiph121 (talk) 07:20, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment There is evidence that Foreign ministers had a role on APEC summits and there are closely linked to other as evident in APEC ministerial meetings and are not a cruft and therefore highly significant and legitimate. It is highly recommended that these template should be retained and lift off the nomination for deletion immediately. Saiph121 (talk) 03:32, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep - It is pointless that without the foreign ministers in APEC, there would be no effect on APEC's function as an economic organization that focuses not just on trade, monetary system but foreign relations as well; Furthermore, like what was mentioned in three previous comments, deleting or removing these template is absolutely pointless as it served its purpose, this is considered as completely accurate and therefore should absolutely be kept and retained. Saiph121 (talk) 00:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete I am not in favour of templates such as these. Unless the foreign ministers of APEC have received coverage as a while, it doesn't serve a purpose. There are way too many of these templates already. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 00:58, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep - It seems that you really don't get the point. The foreign ministers of APEC (member economies they represent) had a coverage (see the example of the foreign ministerial meeting of APEC, [2]) and yet based on the 4 discussions, they have a purpose. There a valid reason these should be retained and remind that these template is not a cruft and are legitimate. Saiph121 (talk) 1:21, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Struck duplicate keep--Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:31, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Question and Comment - What is the point if the APEC ministerial meetings don't have a coverage on the foreign ministers of APEC at all? Strictly speaking, (see the web page of APEC meeting papers section - Annual ministerial meetings and then browse the recent ministerial meetings and previous ministerial meetings, [3]) the foreign ministers of APEC do group together and participate in these ministerial meetings and it is there they will make joint declaration of several of the current policies. On the five discussions being made, it's a proof that the foreign ministers of APEC had these coverage and a reason why should not be removed and retained instead. Saiph121 (talk) 1:58, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete New Zealand incumbents in Cabinet roles and Central Bank Governor change too often for the work needed to keep these templates up to date to be practical. The importance of having this information in a Wikipedia template is extremely low. EvidenceFairy (talk) 06:41, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep and Comment - Importance of this information in this Wikipedia template is absolutely and extremely necessary, important and highly important given to the note of those previous discussions. It is possible to keep these template up to date same as the template of G8 and G20. There is strictly and extremely no need to remove it. Saiph121 (talk) 12:02, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Struck duplicate keep. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:31, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:ASEAN Central Bank Governors[edit]

This is...what should I call it...ASEAN cruft? ASEAN as a group is well known, but the central bank governors of ASEAN countries isn't a significant topic itself. I don't see the navigational purpose served by this template. We don't have templates such as "Current central bank governors of NATO/SAARC/African Union" etc. Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:39, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment I just looked and realised G20 seems to have a bunch of similar templates. It is possible that the editor looked that those and eplicated it for ASEAN. We might need to decide whether we need templates such as these. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment This should not be deleted regarding the template ASEAN's central bank governors as it has a significant purpose and navigational purpose served by this template. Alongside Finance Ministers, the central bank governors represent ASEAN countries during ASEAN Summits similar to the G8 and G20. Saiph121 (talk) 06:58, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete essentially cruft, of the sort that frequently crops up in South Asian articles. No evidence that this group of central bankers have received any treatment in reliable sources as a group, nor that they have closer connections to each other than to any other central bank governors. I have run into this issue with this editor before. Vanamonde (talk) 06:57, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment There is evidence that Central bank governors had a role alongside finance ministers during ASEAN ministerial meetings and that is so these template are highly significant and important as well they are not a cruft. It should be highly suggested to retain these templates as well lift off the nomination for deletion immediately. Saiph121 (talk) 03:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.210.72.169 (talk)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of the 6th SS MD[edit]

Insufficient navigation -- only two entries. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:26, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete Doesn't serve the purpose for navigation. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:43, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Encouragment[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 delete as per WP:T2. ~ Rob13Talk 19:33, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

This encourages sockpuppetry. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 03:09, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

  • What the...? Delete. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete I was like, wait what? Created on 13 May 2006 by ForestH2 who was blocked for socking. How did template survive 10 years? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:42, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete tempted to IAR delete this myself as disruptive material, only holding off because it isn't transcluded much. Vanamonde (talk) 07:01, 11 December 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).

December 10[edit]

Template:2002 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Group 9[edit]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:2002 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Group 2[edit]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:2002 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Group 1[edit]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:1952–53 MCHL standings (men)[edit]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:17, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

I will use any/all of the MCHL, WIHL, WCHA, ECAC Hockey, etc... standings templates prior to 1970 when I am able to find the time to create the main pages for those seasons. In the meantime I've added links to some of the templates so that they aren't completely orphaned. PensRule11385 Talk 22:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:1951–52 MCHL standings (men)[edit]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:17, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

See above

Template:2005 Baylor Lady Bears basketball navbox[edit]

Insufficient player blue links to be useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 22:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:1924–25 Ohio Athletic Conference men's basketball standings[edit]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:1923–24 Ohio Athletic Conference men's basketball standings[edit]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Qif[edit]

Deprecated template. GXXF T • C 15:07, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Hasn't been any nominations for deletion of this template in a long time now; imo it's historical and should be kept as such. →AzaToth 17:04, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Keep as historical. — xaosflux Talk 17:05, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete There is no need to keep templates that have been deprecated and non-functional for ten years! Pppery 21:59, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete. We don't keep templates just for their use in ten-year-old page revisions. It's difficult to maintain the template namespace when we have lots of these old relics floating around clogging up database reports, etc. ~ Rob13Talk 02:06, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Isn't this the famous template that ultimately prompted the creation of the parser functions? Then it's an obvious keep for historical reasons. It's also linked from a few hundred pages. – Uanfala (talk) 02:13, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep as historical. It's linked to from 739 pages. I don't see how it can adversely affect server speed or memory. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment - not sure where else to post this. Is Qif called by {{cite web}}, because every instance of cite web no longer shows the citation information, but instead says "‹ The template below (Qif) is being considered for deletion. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus.›" in the reference section. Can something be done about that? See Debra Ruh, which I am trying to save from deletion.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:06, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Sorry to interrupt, it's fixed now.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:21, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
@CaroleHenson: This was a temporary glitch resulting from Anthony Appleyard doing a histmerge involving that template at my request. Pppery 00:22, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep per Uanfala and Kudpung. It seems valuable as a historical reference given the revelations from Uanfala.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 06:23, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:27, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Keep as historical Flow 234 (Nina) talk 11:03, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox urban feature[edit]

Redundant to, variously, {{Infobox street}}, {{Infobox park}}, {{infobox artwork}} or others. Only 55 transclusions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Oppose - not exactly the same as any one of the above things Alaney2k (talk) 15:33, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
    • Strawman. Given that it tries to do the job of all of them, of course it's not "exactly the same", and no claim is made that it is. It is, though, redundant to them. Please give examples of pages which use it, where another infobox would not suffice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
      • The infobox urban feature lets you label what the urban feature is. The others are hard-coded by type. It's for miscellaneous types. None of the three have that feature. The Baldwin Steps is neither a street, park or artwork. The above three are poor substitutes, although of course it is possible to use them. Alaney2k (talk) 20:40, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
        • Such labels can be provided in the other infoboxes, too. For example, Infobox park has |type=, as does Infobox street. Baldwin Steps could use - and - indeed has previously used, until you removed it - Infobox street, which "may be used for urban and rural thoroughfares, lanes, alleys, public highways and similar features". Your objection at that time was that Infobox street did not have a map; it does now. I asked you for "examples of pages which use [Infobox urban feature], where another infobox would not suffice". Do you have any? One, even? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
          • I said you could use others already. I said they are not as good, Baldwin Steps included. I'll ask you then, which template provides -all= of the components that this one does? Alaney2k (talk) 13:16, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
  • replace any with suitable replacements, then reconsider. if you want a encompassing template that could replace this, try {{geobox}}, but I doubt that would be an agreeable option for other reasons. Frietjes (talk) 14:19, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Thanks for doing that. Sincerely. The look is nearly the same, but I do think the category was better in the colored band. That's just a minor point, of course. When I put together Infobox urban feature, I put in a grab-bag of features. I'm wondering if it is possible to put Infobox urban feature on top of Geobox. And of course, whether there is any objection to that, and even if it is possible. I mean, I don't feel like the real reason for wanting Infobox urban feature deleted has been expressed. I mean, yes those other tpls exist, but they are not exactly as useful/complete and not better. And I don't think the inclusion count is that important. I mean, I can see several dozen urban squares it could be used for. If it was built on top of Geobox, I wonder if any objections would be removed. I think geobox, using the free fields, could work, but I would not want to have to set up free fields all the time. I did put in features in articles like Seoul Plaza to show naming, too. Right now, I still want to keep the infobox urban feature tpl. Alaney2k (talk) 21:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Alaney2k, the colour used by geobox is toggled by the type, in this case "Steps", which is the same colour used for buildings. if there is a need for a different colour for steps, I am sure it could be added to the list. yes, it would be easy to rewrite this infobox to call geobox internally. Frietjes (talk) 19:52, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
@Frietjes:Yes. But is there a need to rewrite it for geobox? It is based on Infobox now, what would be the point? What would be the improvement? And anyway, the proposer just wants to do away with it. Alaney2k (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Alaney2k, you asked "I'm wondering if it is possible to put Infobox urban feature on top of Geobox". and the answer is yes. the only benefit that I see for doing so would be for the purposes of replacing this template with the more generic geobox template. you asked for a template that could replace all the trancslusions of this one and I found one for you. Frietjes (talk) 13:14, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:21, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Cite BDE[edit]

This is a citation template for the archives of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle at the Brooklyn Public Library. It was created in 2007. It appears that in 2014 the site was relaunched as a partnership with Newspapers.com. The content is still there, but all the links are broken and probably can't be fixed given how the Newspapers.com platform handles deep linking. My thinking is that this template should be deprecated and editors encouraged to create WP:Newspapers.com-style clippings. Mackensen (talk) 23:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

When all these BDE articles were originally used before the Newspapers.com acquisition, they were too small to read. Just thought I'd mention this. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 06:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Clarification: the links can't be fixed in the template; editors could still take the information, find the article, and make clippings. Mackensen (talk) 13:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:20, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
    • Fine, but if there's any substitution besides total deletion, we should take it. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 17:54, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Clean it up first, whether automated or manual. I don't support deletion until that's done. There are over 100 articles that use the template, some multiple times. Dovid (talk) 01:33, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
    • That's the proposal; to deprecate it and replace all usages. Mackensen (talk) 13:16, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Locator map[edit]

unused, may be related to template:infobox map? Frietjes (talk) 16:32, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Delete --- this was a template used in {{Infobox mountain range}} to assist in conversion from {{Geobox}}. It was used from 2012 (when written by Droll) until 2014 (when I hacked rarely-used complex map functionality out of the mountain range infobox). It can now be safely deleted. —hike395 (talk) 17:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Deodhar Trophy[edit]

Only 4 blue links. GXXF T • C 12:24, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:MundoMax Texas[edit]

MundoMax is no longer on the air. Mbrstooge (talk) 06:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:MundoMax California[edit]

MundoMax is no longer on the air. Mbrstooge (talk) 06:00, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

December 9[edit]

Template:Semi-orphan[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 G7 by Tom harrison (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

There is not and never has been any such thing as a "semi-orphan" on Wikipedia, and introducing such a thing would be a massive cultural shift which at the very least would require a full-fledged RFC (which would almost certainly be resoundingly defeated). Assuming the intention behind this is something along the lines of "three or fewer incoming links, disregarding links from within navboxes" this would encompass a huge swathe of Wikipedia, including a sizeable proportion of featured articles.  ‑ Iridescent 21:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

This is meant to replace the "few" parameter of {{orphan}}; I will move it to a better title. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 21:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Nobody should be using the |few= parameter on en-wiki, as it's an artefact left over from a long-abandoned notion from Nupedia days that all articles should have at least three incoming links; every time it's ever come up for discussion (most recently here) consensus has overwhelmingly been against expanding the definition of "orphan" from the existing "only place the {{Orphan}} tag if the article has zero incoming links from other articles" (in big bold letters on WP:ORPHAN, so it's not as if it's hidden). ‑ Iridescent 22:01, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I will change the template to remove the ambox-Orphan CSS class. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 22:06, 9 December 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:Knight's Cross recipients of the Kriegsmarine small battle units[edit]

Insufficient navigation: only two entries. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:08, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Id Software file formats[edit]

Fails most of the navbox criteria: no article on the template's subject, weak links between each entries, most entries now redirected as remnants of a bygone Wikipedia. Not worth redirecting the template to any other Id Software-related navbox. czar 06:24, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Delete: "most entries now redirected" Well, that's because you just deleted all those articles... However, I do agree that this template is not very needed. --DanielPharos (talk) 09:10, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Merge: Actually, now that I think about it, its links should probably be merged into the "technology" section of Template:Quake series. --DanielPharos (talk) 08:32, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Cc-by-sa-2.0-be[edit]

Unused image licensing template. ~ Rob13Talk 06:31, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep: It's a permissible license, and it has been used in the past. --Carnildo (talk) 07:23, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Radio stations[edit]

Unused. Every station link just goes to the same station in each of these. ~ Rob13Talk 18:33, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Keep, as format templates can be sorted 3 ways (call, frequency, community of license); station formats are fluid, so stations get moved from one template to another as their format changes; other formats have templates with translators too, and each represents a different way of hearing said station/format.Stereorock (talk) 06:19, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Addendum: For example, the Maine template used to have more stations with the W-Bach network, each a fully-licensed station. A station could flip into the classical format at any time.Stereorock (talk) 06:23, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Update: WCVT in the Vt. list flipped from Classical, but VPR operates a Classical network, which has been listed & there are several different stations in the network with their own pages.Stereorock (talk) 22:22, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Yugoslavia squad - 1967 FIBA World Championship for Women[edit]

unused, non-notable squad Frietjes (talk) 14:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Keep, Should not be deleted for a reason because it connects the article of the players that are this year played for the national team. — Nn94 14 (talk) 16:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Nn94 14, why is a 6th place squad notable? Frietjes (talk) 19:14, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
@Frietjes:, for example there is this template about men's national team of Germany at FIBA World Cup played 2010 when it is Germany finished at 17th place? This and similar templates is was not disputed existence. Whether it is 17th place significant than 6th place? Did the men more significant than women? What is the problem to the template was deleted? — Nn94 14 (talk) 16:33, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Nn94 14, the Template:Germany Squad 2010 FIBA World Championship should be deleted as well, along with all non-championship winning squad templates. as a female, I will ignore your attempts to assert gender bias in my nomination. Frietjes (talk) 17:12, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per long-standing consensus to not maintain non-notable squad templates for non-winning/significant squads. This is unused because it doesn't define any of the players in the navbox. ~ Rob13Talk 19:24, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Slovenia Squad 2010 FIBA World Championship[edit]

4th or lower place squad, not notable, and duplicates 2010 FIBA World Championship squads/2010 FIBA World Championship for Women squads. Frietjes (talk) 16:00, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

@Frietjes: The only reason for deletion is that it is not winnig one of the first three places? Where in the regulations it says so. If you show a valid reason that should be deleted, I would not object. — Nn94 14 (talk) 16:52, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Nn94 14, for related discussions which resulted in deletion, see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, ... many of these are for football or junior-level competitions, but the first one is directly related. Frietjes (talk) 14:41, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
@Frietjes: To that similar templates deleted in selective situations, it is not disputed. But i still have not said where it says in the rules that it must. As I said, if indicated a rule by which it is done, I will not complain. — Nn94 14 (talk) 11:24, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete. There's a long-standing consensus that we don't keep navboxes for these, as they aren't defining characteristics of these players and result in serious template creep. Footy players can play on their national squad for a decade, sometimes. Imagine if we put up a navbox on each of their pages for every international competition they participated in during that time, in addition to teams and such. That would be lunacy. ~ Rob13Talk 00:23, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep: it makes no sense to delete this, and then dozens of other templates have to also be deleted. There is absolutely zero reason to delete these.Bluesangrel (talk) 16:58, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of the 215th ID[edit]

Template contains one entry K.e.coffman (talk) 00:43, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:KCwithOL[edit]

Does not meet WP:NAV

  • "Templates should be kept small in size as a large template has limited navigation value" -- this template links over 800 articles, which is excessive
  • "Navigation templates provide navigation between related articles" -- the articles are not related apart from the subjects having received the same award.

This template replicates "Category:Recipients of the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves" and is unnecessary. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Unblock request declined[edit]

Propose merging Template:Unblock request declined with Template:Unblock reviewed.
This is just a hard-coded instance of {{Unblock reviewed}}. The syntax required for both are literally identical, though, and this is meant to be substitute-only. It's not clear why we need this. ~ Rob13Talk 04:26, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

  • I too can't see any reason for having this. However, I really don't see "I can't see a reason for having both" as a reason for getting rid of one of them. If they both do the same thing, what harm is done by keeping them both? And it is just possible that there actually is some advantage in having both, that neither you nor I have thought of. (There is probably no point in trying to ask the editor who created the second version, as he has not edited for over two years, and the template was created about five years ago.) Most probably it will make no difference whatever whether we merge them or not, but in the absence of any benefit to be gained by merging, we may as well leave things as they are. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Redirect as a pointless wrapper template Pppery 20:18, 22 November 2016 (UTC) (edited: 02:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC))
  • Question Just as {{Unblock request declined}} is a hard-coded instance of {{Unblock reviewed}} with the |decline= parameter selected, the template {{Unblocked}} is a hard-coded instance of {{Unblock reviewed}} with the |accept= parameter selected. If the latter is so useful as a shortcut/mnemonic that it isn't being considered for merging, then why isn't the former? --RexxS (talk) 22:11, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep Contrary to the nominator's assertion, the syntax of the two templates is not identical, literally or otherwise. {{Unblock request declined}} does not allow an |accept= parameter, for obvious reasons. If you redirect it, you then enable the possibility of making that mistake. In what way could that be considered an improvement? --RexxS (talk) 22:18, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
    • It seems like an unlikely mistake to add a parameter you don't want, whose name describes it pretty well. Pppery 15:40, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
      • Errare humanum est - why make it easier to make even unlikely mistakes when there's nothing to gain from a merge? --RexxS (talk) 21:35, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:04, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Commenting on the above keep rationale, {{Unblocked}} would be a likely follow-up nomination. If an administrator is so incompetent that they decide to use the {{Unblock request declined}} template but accidentally (how?!) use the accept parameter instead, they've likely already botched things by failing to supply a decline rationale. Additionally, they shouldn't be an administrator with that level of incompetence. Meanwhile, while this hypothetical but entirely implausible error is being mentioned as a rationale to keep, we have actual real errors occurring. Administrators using this template are not substituting it despite it being a subst-only template. (Note that WP:T3 borderline applies to this template in any event, although I didn't consider it appropriate given the transclusions.) ~ Rob13Talk 22:17, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of the Feldherrnhalle units[edit]

Template contains three entries two of which are redirects to a list K.e.coffman (talk) 00:32, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of the FPD 2[edit]

Template contains one entry. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of the Luftwaffe reconnaissance force[edit]

Template contains one entry K.e.coffman (talk) 00:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

December 8[edit]

Template:Geobox protected area[edit]

this has been deprecated for some time as redundant to "Geobox|protected area". I have replaced the remaining 300 transclusions, so this can be safely deleted (or redirected). Frietjes (talk) 17:22, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Geobox locator Afghanistan[edit]

unused, redundant to (and replaced by) the more commonly used {{location map}} system Frietjes (talk) 15:51, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

No objection, as long as legacy uses of {{Geobox}} are not broken by the change, meaning all parameter values used to call Geobox locator templates are correctly translated by the Geobox template code to the equivalent Location Map call (or that old Geobox locator parameter values are changed by a bot to new Location Map parameter values); that the pages Template:Geobox/legend and other references pages such as Template:Geobox/type/river, Template:Geobox/sample and Template:Geobox/doc/River are updated to indicate that new uses of Geobox should use parameters calling the correct Location Map template. Frietjes, I see you have been working on the Geobox template code, but I regret I am not skilled enough to know if the changes you have been making in fact address some of my points.--papageno (talk) 06:40, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
papageno, yes, I have only nominated ones which have already been converted to use the |pushpin_map= syntax. I will update the documentation as you suggested. Frietjes (talk) 19:32, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, I see how you've replaced things on some articles using the Geobox locators that you are proposing deleting her. For example, converting from {{Geobox locator California}} to {{Location map USA California}} at the article Deadman Creek (Owens River) via this edit. I gather your goal is to replace all Geobox locator templates with Location map templates. I think it makes sense to also add a comment to the Talk page for Geobox to perhaps solicit more input, so I have just done that. Please correct anything I have mischaracterized there. Face-smile.svg --papageno (talk) 04:40, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:IPsockCheckuser[edit]

This exposes Checkuser info to non-Checkusers. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 15:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Largest cities of Lithuania[edit]

single-use template, should be merged with the article; no need for a separate template Frietjes (talk) 14:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Old discussions[edit]

December 7[edit]

Template:Image source copyright[edit]

This template is currently the close duplicate of template:file source. It should be deleted and then re-created as redirect to that template. George Ho (talk) 20:42, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Appalachian State Mountaineers quarterback navbox[edit]

Delete or Listify. Of the 20 quarterbacks listed in this navbox, only six have articles; the rest aren't even redlinked (probably because they will never meet WP:NCOLLATH). If you think about it, this makes sense, since no college program in its history is going to have all (or even a majority) of its quarterbacks be notable enough to meet WP:NCOLLATH. Per WP:NAV, unlinked entries should be avoided in navboxes; a proliferation of redlinks is also discouraged. I think this is a perfect example of where a list would be much more appropriate than a navbox. In a list article there is no issue with having redlinked and unlinked names. In fact, we already have Category:Lists of college football quarterbacks which has far fewer articles than we have navboxes in Category:American college football quarterback navigational boxes. Note that no List of Appalachian State Mountaineers starting quarterbacks existed as of the posting of this TfD, and the title link for the navbox was to Appalachian State Mountaineers football. –Grondemar 15:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Listify, keep, and remove the unlinked names from the template. As per my earlier comment here. Ejgreen77 (talk) 04:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Alabama Crimson Tide quarterback navbox[edit]

Delete. Of the 82 quarterbacks listed in this navbox, just under half (40 of 82) are redlinks. If you think about it, this makes sense, since no college program in its history is going to have all (or even a majority) of its quarterbacks be notable enough to meet WP:NCOLLATH. Per WP:NAV, unlinked entries should be avoided in navboxes; a proliferation of redlinks is also discouraged. I think this is a perfect example of where a list would be much more appropriate than a navbox. In a list article there is no issue with having redlinked and unlinked names. In fact, we already have Category:Lists of college football quarterbacks which has far fewer articles than we have navboxes in Category:American college football quarterback navigational boxes. Note that List of Alabama Crimson Tide starting quarterbacks already exists. –Grondemar 15:14, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Keep. Not sure what to do about the G5s, but most of the red-linked ones at a school about Alabama are notable enough to have an article, even if no one has made one yet. Jhn31 (talk) 04:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I thought the rule was that navboxes should be made between existing articles; see WP:EXISTING. How do we know that the red-linked Alabama quarterbacks are notable, since there are no articles and therefore no linked sources asserting notability? –Grondemar 23:09, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Keep, and remove the unlinked names from the template. As per my earlier comment here. Ejgreen77 (talk) 04:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Akron Zips quarterback navbox[edit]

Delete or Listify. Of the 16 quarterbacks listed in this navbox, only four have articles; the rest aren't even redlinked (probably because they will never meet WP:NCOLLATH). If you think about it, this makes sense, since no college program in its history is going to have all (or even a majority) of its quarterbacks be notable enough to meet WP:NCOLLATH. Per WP:NAV, unlinked entries should be avoided in navboxes; a proliferation of redlinks is also discouraged. I think this is a perfect example of where a list would be much more appropriate than a navbox. In a list article there is no issue with having redlinked and unlinked names. In fact, we already have Category:Lists of college football quarterbacks which has far fewer articles than we have navboxes in Category:American college football quarterback navigational boxes. Note that no List of Akron Zips starting quarterbacks existed as of the posting of this TfD, and the title link for the navbox was to Akron Zips football. –Grondemar 03:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Listify, keep, and remove the unlinked names from the template. As per my earlier comment here. Ejgreen77 (talk) 04:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Air Force Falcons quarterback navbox[edit]

Delete or Listify. Of the 25 quarterbacks listed in this navbox, only four have articles; the rest aren't even redlinked (probably because they will never meet WP:NCOLLATH). If you think about it, this makes sense, since no college program in its history is going to have all (or even a majority) of its quarterbacks be notable enough to meet WP:NCOLLATH. Per WP:NAV, unlinked entries should be avoided in navboxes; a proliferation of redlinks is also discouraged. I think this is a perfect example of where a list would be much more appropriate than a navbox. In a list article there is no issue with having redlinked and unlinked names. In fact, we already have Category:Lists of college football quarterbacks which has far fewer articles than we have navboxes in Category:American college football quarterback navigational boxes. Note that no List of Air Force Falcons starting quarterbacks existed as of the posting of this TfD, and the title link for the navbox was to Air Force Falcons football. –Grondemar 03:52, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Listify, keep, and remove the unlinked names from the template. As per my earlier comment here. Ejgreen77 (talk) 04:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Connecticut Huskies quarterback navbox[edit]

Delete or Listify. Of the 14 quarterbacks listed in this navbox, only four have articles; the rest aren't even redlinked (probably because they will never meet WP:NCOLLATH). If you think about it, this makes sense, since no college program in its history is going to have all (or even a majority) of its quarterbacks be notable enough to meet WP:NCOLLATH. Per WP:NAV, unlinked entries should be avoided in navboxes; a proliferation of redlinks is also discouraged. I think this is a perfect example of where a list would be much more appropriate than a navbox. In a list article there is no issue with having redlinked and unlinked names. In fact, we already have Category:Lists of college football quarterbacks which has far fewer articles than we have navboxes in Category:American college football quarterback navigational boxes. Note that no List of Connecticut Huskies starting quarterbacks existed as of the posting of this TfD, and the title link for the navbox was to Connecticut Huskies football. –Grondemar 03:50, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Listify, keep, and remove the unlinked names from the template. As per my earlier comment here. Ejgreen77 (talk) 04:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Heads of the Ministries of the Government of 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 ~ Rob13Talk 06:56, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Propose merging Template:Heads of the Ministries of the Government of India with Template:Union ministries of India.
I propose to merge both the templates to create one template since both are about same topics. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 20:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:59, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Oppose Both templates are not about the same topics. One is about ministries, the other lists of ministers.—indopug (talk) 08:56, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:00, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:01, 7 December 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).

December 6[edit]

Template:Culture of Andorra[edit]

unused and duplicates the culture section in template:Andorra topics Frietjes (talk) 20:31, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

  • Disagree Added to Culture of Andorra page for consistency with like pages for other countries. Kilometers to Verona (talk) 09:49, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
    • so we need a big sidebar for a single article? Frietjes (talk) 15:13, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:12, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, this should either be added to all pages it links to, those links should be removed, or it should be deleted. I won't relist this myself since I've expressed an opinion, but I think this should be relisted. If no additional transclusions have been added for 7 days (pinging Kilometers to Verona in case they want to do so), I'd say delete. If this is transcluded on all articles it links to and the total transclusions are four or more, keep. ~ Rob13Talk 06:56, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Airbus Group/aircraft[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 06:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

This template appears to be an outdated duplicate of Template:Airbus Group aircraft, and the only page that links to it is a unused template report. -Sonicwave (talk|c) 19:56, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete; unused Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
    to reply to me     14:47, 7 December 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:Singkawang[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 06:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

None of the articles linked contained any material and all have been redirected to the main article, Singkawang. The navbox serves no navigational function. Cabayi (talk) 11:47, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

  • delete, all redirects. Frietjes (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete, serves no navigational function and linked articles is just redirect. --Bagas Chrisara (talk) 03:44, 13 December 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).

Unused tournament bracket 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 ~ Rob13Talk 06:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Criterion #3 of WP:TFD#REASONS: These templates are not used, and will continue to be unused indefinitely, until Major League Soccer (MLS) or the National Football League (NFL), respectively, ever decide to expand their respective playoff tournaments to include 16 teams. We should not create templates merely "just in case" for WP:CBALL reasons that might never happen for several years. Zzyzx11 (talk) 09:12, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

  • delete, we don't need it. Frietjes (talk) 18:50, 6 December 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).

December 5[edit]

Template:GPC2011riders[edit]

Outdated template without real use. The riders in the 2011 group are there. That information isn't going to change. There is no reason to have a template (even if used on multiple pages) to convey information that is completely static. The Banner talk 22:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

  • merge with the article and delete as was decided last month. for templates used on more than one page, we can use LST, as was decided last month. Frietjes (talk) 23:09, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:GPC2010riders[edit]

Outdated template without real use. The riders in the 2010 group are there. That information isn't going to change. There is no reason to have a template (even if used on multiple pages) to convey information that is completely static. The Banner talk 22:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

  • merge with the article and delete as was decided last month. for templates used on more than one page, we can use LST, as was decided last month. Frietjes (talk) 23:09, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:TIB2010riders[edit]

Outdated template without real use. The riders in the 2010 group are there. That information isn't going to change. There is no reason to have a template (even if used on multiple pages) to convey information that is completely static. The Banner talk 22:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Pipe[edit]

Propose merging Template:Pipe with Template:!.
{{pipe}} does not appear to be as much used as {{!}} (466 according to the transclusion count) - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:16, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Keep. See the note in the see also section of {{Pipe}}. {{!}} is a magic word in the MediaWiki software and is interpreted differently than {{Pipe}} by the software. They have the same visual output, but not the same purpose. ~ Rob13Talk 22:21, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Keep per BU Rob13. They may look the same, but they have very different meanings for the MediaWiki parser, and thus have different functionality.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 17:56, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Alabama Crimson Tide women's gymnastics coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:50, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Youngstown State Penguins baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:50, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Winthrop Eagles baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:50, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:VCU Rams baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:49, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:UTSA Roadrunners baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:49, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:UNLV Rebels baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:49, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:UNC Wilmington Seahawks baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:49, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:UNC Greensboro Spartans baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:49, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:UMBC Retrievers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:UIC Flames baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:UC Davis Aggies baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:UAB Blazers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Stetson Hatters baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:47, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Southeast Missouri State Redhawks baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:46, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Siena Saints baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:46, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:San Diego Toreros baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:46, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Saint Louis Billikens baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:46, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Sacred Heart Pioneers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:46, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Rider Broncs baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:46, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Presbyterian Blue Hose baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:45, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Northern Colorado Bears baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links (one is repeated). Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:North Florida Ospreys baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Strong oppose The North Florida baseball program began in 1988 and has only had two head coaches in its history, both of whom have linked articles. This nomination on "only" having three blue links is completely inapplicable. Jrcla2 (talk) 05:42, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
    • All the more applicable, actually, as explained in other nominations. We use navigational boxes to navigate, not out of some sense of uniformity. Given the number of articles here, this particular team doesn't require a navbox. ~ Rob13Talk 02:56, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. A succession template or category works best here. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 03:26, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Nicholls State Colonels baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Monmouth Hawks baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:43, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Missouri State Bears baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:43, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Milwaukee Panthers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:43, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Marist Red Foxes baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:43, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Loyola Marymount Lions baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:42, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Long Beach State Dirtbags baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:42, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Lamar Cardinals baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links (one is repeated). Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:42, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Kennesaw State Owls baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:42, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:High Point Panthers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:41, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Georgia State Panthers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:41, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Florida Gulf Coast Eagles baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Oppose The Florida Gulf Coast baseball program began play in 2003 and has only had one head coach in its history. This nomination on "only" having two blue links is inapplicable since one day Dave Tollett will no longer coach the team. Jrcla2 (talk) 05:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
    • Navboxes are for navigation. Further, WP:EXISTING is a guideline that states navboxes are for navigation among existing articles. There is no navigational value to a template that only allows someone to navigate to a single article other than the one they're already at. ~ Rob13Talk 02:55, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 03:25, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:FIU Panthers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Fairfield Stags baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:East Tennessee State Buccaneers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:College of Charleston Cougars baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Coastal Carolina Chanticleers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Charlotte 49ers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Charleston Southern Buccaneers baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Canisius Golden Griffins baseball coach navbox[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 ~ Rob13Talk 02:54, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:39, 5 December 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:Cal State Bakersfield Roadrunners baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Strong oppose. The Cal State Bakersfield baseball program began play in 2009 and has only had two head coaches in its history, both of whom have linked articles. This nomination on "only" having three blue links is inapplicable. Jrcla2 (talk) 05:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
    • All the more applicable, actually, in the sense that it's impossible to meet the threshold we typically use for navboxes. Navboxes are for navigation. Where a navbox doesn't aid navigation, we don't throw it on the article just to make it look pretty. ~ Rob13Talk 02:54, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 03:20, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Bryant Bulldogs baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Binghamton Bearcats baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Alcorn State Braves baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Alabama State Hornets baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Alabama A&M Bulldogs baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Air Force Falcons baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Abilene Christian Wildcats baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Lubbock Christian Chaparrals football coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:35, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Strong oppose. The Lubbock Christian football program began in 1979 and only had two head coaches in its history before the program disbanded, both of whom have linked articles. This nomination on "only" having three blue links is inapplicable. Jrcla2 (talk) 05:50, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
    • It's all the more applicable, actually. That means it will never have more than three links. The two articles can just contain wikilinks to each other, so the navigation could be available in the article without the use of all the visual real estate. ~ Rob13Talk 02:52, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. The category or a succession template is better. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 03:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Lubbock Christian Chaparrals baseball coach navbox[edit]

Two blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:34, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Oglethorpe Stormy Petrels baseball coach navbox[edit]

Three blue links. Insufficient navigation at this time. No objection to undeletion once additional articles are created or a move to userspace. ~ Rob13Talk 21:34, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Knight's Cross recipients of NJG 100[edit]

Only two entries. ~ Rob13Talk 21:26, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 13:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:RFDNote-NPF[edit]

I was originally going to tag this template with {{Db-t3}} since the function it serves is duplicative of {{RFDNote}}, in addition to the template seemingly being unused. However, this template was created by a member of the Wikimedia Foundation, so I'm not sure what is going on since it may be used in a way I don't see and I don't want to break anything. Steel1943 (talk) 21:15, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Just reviewed the template's documentation. Is this template still hardcoded into the New Pages Feed? I can't tell since I don't see any obvious connections to this template and any "MediaWiki:" namespace pages. Steel1943 (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
It looks like it is used & subst'd via https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki-extensions-PageTriage/blob/0aa029dc2dd1e1d618b2b5c4333e08d2876366d2/modules/ext.pageTriage.defaultDeletionTagsOptions/ext.pageTriage.defaultDeletionTagsOptions.js#L319 - So, keep and amend docs (partially done). Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:22, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Delete and amend whatever is using this to use the standard {{RFDNote}} rather than forking its own duplicate. Pppery 20:29, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:TCW2011riders[edit]

Outdated template without real use. The riders in the 2011 group are there. That information isn't going to change. There is no reason to have a template (even if used on multiple pages) to convey information that is completely static. The squad even does not use that name anymore... The Banner talk 14:42, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

  • merge with the article and delete as was decided last month. for templates used on more than one page, we can use LST, as was decided last month. Frietjes (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:GEW2012riders[edit]

Outdated template without real use. The riders in the 2012 group are there. That information isn't going to change. There is no reason to have a template (even if used on multiple pages) to convey information that is completely static. Only used in one article, so text can be transcluded there. The Banner talk 10:56, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Note Template is about the 2012 riders, not 2013. Template is currently used in two articles. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 08:24, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Keep see reasoning here, at the other nomination.
  • merge with the article and delete as was decided last month. for templates used on more than one page, we can use LST, as was decided last month. Frietjes (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Merge then delete as per the above and past results. This should match the previous TfD outcome. ~ Rob13Talk 02:57, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:TIB2012riders[edit]

Outdated template without real use. The riders in the 2012 group are there. That information isn't going to change. There is no reason to have a template (even if used on multiple pages) to convey information that is completely static. Only used in one article, so text can be transcluded there. The Banner talk 10:56, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Note Template is about the 2012 riders, not 2013. Template is currently used in two articles. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 08:24, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Keep see reasoning here, at the other nomination.
  • merge with the article and delete as was decided last month. for templates used on more than one page, we can use LST, as was decided last month. Frietjes (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Merge then delete as per the above and past results. This should match the previous TfD outcome. ~ Rob13Talk 02:57, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:Alrahim Wright III[edit]

Template of a non-existent article Alrahim R. Rose-Wright III. Marvellous Spider-Man 10:04, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:The Flash[edit]

Speedy delete as redundant under WP:CSD#T3. All links included at {{Arrowverse}}. Rob Sinden (talk) 09:02, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Template:GPC2012riders[edit]

Outdated template without real use. The riders in the 2012 group are there. That information isn't going to change. There is no reason to have a template (even if used on multiple pages) to convey information that is completely static. Only used in one article, so text can be transcluded there. The Banner talk 00:42, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Note Template is about the 2012 riders, not 2013. template was nominated hours after its creation and is currently used in two articles. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 08:24, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Keep see reasoning here, at the other nomination. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 08:24, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
I came across this template on Templates with disambiguation links, I am not floowing you around. But the information is absolutely static, so transclusion in the parent article is the better idea. And this has happened more with the outdated team-templates. Why you keep creating them is a mystery to me. The Banner talk 11:00, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template is not outdated. Some information needs to be adjusted for coming in/out riders during the season. See reasoning here, at the other nomination. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 11:19, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
During the season 2012????? The Banner talk 11:25, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the riders during the 2012 season, that's why 2012 is in the title. But I see you saw it already yourself and changed it. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 13:23, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm, your remark Some information needs to be adjusted for coming in/out riders during the season. is rather strange as I can not happen to note that this is a template about 2012 while the present date is 5 December 2016. So there will be no changes during the season, as that is four years ago... The Banner talk 22:35, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
  • merge with the article and delete as was decided last month. for templates used on more than one page, we can use LST, as was decided last month. Frietjes (talk) 16:10, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Merge then delete as per the above and past results. This should match the previous TfD outcome. ~ Rob13Talk 02:57, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Delete and subst on all uses (not using LST) per nom. Pppery 20:33, 13 December 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]

  • None currently

Sports[edit]

Transport[edit]

  • None currently

Other[edit]

Meta[edit]

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)

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).

  • None currently

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.

  • None currently

Archive and Indices[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion&oldid=754877651"