Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 May 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 25 May 27 >

May 26

[edit]

Template:Mila Mason

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

The result of the discussion was keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:53, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Four articles, just short of WP:NENAN Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:58, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:28, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:40, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The articles are linked to each one either directly or through another page. Such as the singles on the album article, the latter is linked on the singer's mainspace. The navbox is not needed. It still falls short of navigation with the four links. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Now that it has five it can be kept. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:29, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Events at the 2021 Islamic Solidarity Games

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 13:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Full of red links, not necessary to have. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:18, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to allow the AfD discussions time to close
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Rotterdam rail

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Rotterdam Metro and Module:Adjacent stations/RandstadRail REEDriler (talk) 19:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Barcelona Tram color

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. All relevant transclusions have been updated to use Module:Adjacent stations/TramMet. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:04, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:JULIANDAY.MONTHABBREV

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 12:08, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Created in 2006. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:00, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

used via substitution... verdy_p (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Where? Some documentation and links would be helpful, otherwise it will just be nominated again at some future date. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:03, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the template was updated after this nomination to make it substitute its output properly [1] and an "insource" search fails to find any occurances of its prior output anywhere I somewhat doubt that this was used at all via substitution. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 16:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 15:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, the post-nomination update to make it a substituted template does not convince me that has been used via substitution, since a insource search for the pre-nomination version returns nothing. Frietjes (talk) 17:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Interwiki issue

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. ✗plicit 13:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Template appears to be related to a 2019 BRFA that never got off the ground. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:56, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Xinbenlv: here for possible BRFA reboot. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Infrared row

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

The result of the discussion was userfy. ✗plicit 13:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Used multiple times, but only in one editor's abandoned draft from 2011. Probably best to userfy. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:35, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or userfy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Userfy and/or deletion is fine. Makes no big difference in terms of the nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Cercanías Madrid color

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Cercanías Madrid. Gonnym (talk) 08:23, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:QR location

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 13:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links. Last modified in 2011. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:CSRT-No

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 13:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022_May_18#Template:CSRT-Yes, the use of this family of templates to transclude blocks of text directly into articles is not how we use templates anymore. subst and delete Hog Farm Talk 03:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:CSRT

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 13:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Used only in a user sandbox; per Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022_May_18#Template:CSRT-Yes the use of this family of templates to transclude paragraphs of text directly into articles where the text can only be edited directly at the template is not desirable. subst and delete Hog Farm Talk 03:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Indian state navigation box

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

The result of the discussion was delete. If the author would like it moved to userspace, let me know and I will do so Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:39, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed in two discussions in 2010, but never adopted. Used in one editor's sandbox. It may be best to userfy it into that editor's user space rather than substing a bunch of navbox code. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or userfy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:26, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not opposed to userfication. But I did read the nomination. Since this template was never adopted for use, I don't the see the harm in deletion. The creator can always request undeletion. But either way, one of these two options is okay. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:21, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless the user who's using in their userspace actually requests it to be userfied, there's no point doing this pre-emptively for what seems like a pointless template. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022_May_26&oldid=1091523481"