Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 March 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 27 March 29 >

March 28[edit]

Template:Today's featured article request[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find any recent use of this template in the current process of WP:TFAR and there are no talk pages using it. It obviously has not been used in at least a year, given that it was designed for years in the 2010s. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 08:07, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sammi Brie: Did you notify any of the TFA pages? Izno (talk) 16:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Izno: No, but I have placed a message now. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:51, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 21:40, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Welcome2 and related[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 Redirect and wrap. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:09, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These are outdated forks of {{Welcome}} (or {{Welcome-retro}}, if you'd prefer) that have been sitting around since as far back as 2004. For {{Welcomenh}}, I assume (the documentation doesn't explain) that "nh" stands for "no heading", but {{Welcome}} already has a |heading=no option, so it should at least be turned into a wrapper. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:22, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect Welcome2/5 to {{Welcome}} and wrapperify Welcomenh as nom. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:28, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 21:37, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support with a new landing page coming best trim some of the overlap to consolidate for new page.Moxy- 22:27, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to more standard templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:42, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to more standard templates. It is very confusing to have so many ways to welcome editors and means the less commonly used methods may fall out of date or be of lesser quality / receive less attention by editors. --Tom (LT) (talk) 04:30, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Taxonomy/Maja (genus)[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:33, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused, not accepted disambiguator qualifier. We already have Template:Taxonomy/Maja Estopedist1 (talk) 21:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Taxonomy/Jubula (animal)[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:33, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused, not suitable disambiguator qualifier. We already have Template:Taxonomy/Jubula Estopedist1 (talk) 21:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Taxonomy/Minerva[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:32, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused, misleading. See Minerva (disambiguation)#Biology Estopedist1 (talk) 19:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Taxonomy/Oculina (genus)[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:32, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused, invalid name. Not needed. Correct Template:Taxonomy/Oculina Estopedist1 (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Taxonomy/Lamniformes (?)[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 14:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused. Bad name. We already have Template:Taxonomy/Lamniformes Estopedist1 (talk) 19:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    • Agree, I made it by accident while trying to make a questionable taxonomy for Aquilolamna, but I forgot you could just do Laminoformes/?, and that problem has now been fixed on Aquilolamna's taxonomy. Geekgecko (talk) 20:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Taxonomy/Incertae sedis/Molluscan (?) class[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused. Invalid name. Eg, similar Incertae sedis stuff is banned in Wikispecies Estopedist1 (talk) 19:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Sinhgad Technical Education Society[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:15, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The institutions in the template are not notable and have been nominated to the AFD thus making this template redundant as well Vikram Vincent 18:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Taxonomy/Eunicea (Superfamilia)[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

to be deleted. Unused, invalid name Estopedist1 (talk) 18:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:France 1987 Five Nations Championship squad[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Five/Six Nations happens every year, and we don't have templates like this for any other year or any other country. The only ones that should exist are for Rugby World Cups. – PeeJay 17:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete As per nomination, historic squad templates only used in rugby union/sevens for World Cups and Olympics as stated. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per the above comments, don't need for every Five/Six Nations Championship. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:52, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Former Super Rugby side templates[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Sunwolves and Southern Kings have both been liquidated having left Super Rugby/Pro14, so there is no need for these templates anymore. The final squads are correct but all players are unlinked anyway. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nomination.Skeene88 (talk) 18:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as the teams no longer exist, they can't have a current squad. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:07, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

South Africa cricket franchise teams[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:50, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket South Africa has now abolished franchise teams in their domestic competitions. Therefore these squad templates are now redundant. Several other templates for cricket teams/leagues that have now become defunct have been recently deleted too (although I don't recall the exact teams involved). Also, many of these are very out of date, and don't reflect the "final" squad(s). Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 14:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all. Redundant current team/squad navboxes. 14:26, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete all assuming the last matches involving these teams have finished. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:58, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Not quite – the last of the franchise competitions (4-day final) is set to finish tomorrow (29 March) – but these navboxes are not accurate anyway, so they're serving no purpose. wjematherplease leave a message... 16:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, support deleting all then. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:27, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Match ended an hour or two ago, with Dolphins winning the final franchise competition. Stick that in your blow-hole and smoke it! Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 14:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all Per nomination and comments above, redundant now competition is finished (from tomorrow anyway) and squads are out of date anyway. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Ukraine national football team results[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:44, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this needed when it is already covered by the Ukraine NF template. HawkAussie (talk) 01:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 12:18, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_28&oldid=1073153275"