Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 January 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 15 January 17 >

January 16[edit]

Template:SPT style[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 as duplicate of Module:Adjacent stations/SPT Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:38, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused with no major edits after creation. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:44, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't notice the date on it. I thought it was a 2021 creation. But if the creator or anyone else thinks userfication is the better option, then I'm for it. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I personally wouldn't nominate this one, but I really have to ask template creators like this one, why does it take more than 10 days to use this template? Templates like this should be used immediately after creation as they are very simple and serve a single use case. Gonnym (talk) 09:51, 17 January 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:S-line/BE-S left/34[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) 21:15, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All unused and probably the last remaining unused S-line templates. All created last year but not needed as the S-line templates are being phased out in favor of Template:Adjacent stations. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose S-line/TCDD left/4th of September Express is being used and I will need some time to change them to the new Adjacent station template format. --Central Data Bank (talk) 10:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Central Data Bank, where exactly is this being used? I don't see it anywhere. If you're going to change this to the adjacent station format then it can be a subpage of yours until then. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:53, 20 January 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:Sporting Cristal squad 2019[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) 21:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Both unused with no mainspace for possible usage. But per NEAN, we don't need a squad navbox for each season, and both were created by a sockpuppet user. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:51, 16 January 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 reality television series[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) 21:05, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a loose collection of television series based on the country of origin and the format of television series. This is the only country reality television series template on Wikipedia and readers are unlikely to use it to transverse between shows that have little in common with each other. The other reality show navigational templates are about an individual series and its articles or about a reality show franchise with all of the series' articles. The template is much handled by Category:Indian reality television series. Aspects (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Too big to navigate easily. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. No parent article either. Nigej (talk) 07:01, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Too large and diverse to navigate. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:37, 17 January 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:Vincent motorcycles (1936-1955)[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) 21:03, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Appears to have been replaced by {{Vincent motorcycles (1927–1939)}} and {{Vincent motorcycles (1946–1955)}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I support the deletion of this template. 19:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Kumboloi (talk) 15:20, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Honestly the other two navboxes could go too, as they're clearly not designed for navigation. Nigej (talk) 19:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as superceded. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:51, 17 January 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:VFL player statistics start[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) 21:02, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, incoming links, or documentation. Unclear why these exist when {{AFL player statistics start}} is available. If necessary, that template could probably be modified with a parameter to indicate VFL, AFL, or both. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. If something is ever required the existing template should be modified. We don't need more and more nearly identical templates. Nigej (talk) 19:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – my reasoning for creating these alternate ones centred around the table caption (the AFL template would say "AFL playing statistics", VFL/AFL would say "VFL/AFL playing statistics" and VFL would say "VFL playing statistics" depending on the player's career span given the league name change in 1990), but it that can be done with a parameter, then sure. I'll happily put my hand up and say that this completely slipped under my radar, but I did mean well when I created them. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 00:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    {{AFL player statistics start}} has |caption= for this. See {{AFL player statistics start/testcases}} for an example. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:25, 17 January 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:Userboxtop2[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) 21:01, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Documentation refers to {{Userboxtop}} instead of this template, perhaps indicating that someone made a copy of that template to experiment with. No substantive edits since 2007. Appears to duplicate the functionality of {{Userboxtop}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. User:GKFXtalk 23:00, 16 January 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:Userboxbabel[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) 21:01, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions or documentation. Appears to be an unused version of the popular {{Userbox-level}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:59, 16 January 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:Userbabelcat[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) 21:00, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, documentation, incoming links, or categories. Only edit was creation in 2013. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:58, 16 January 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:420Collaboration2017template[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:39, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These lie somewhere between the category set which are pointless and should be deleted, and the article set, which are "meh". Either delete completely or merge into the article set with a namespace detection. Gonnym (talk) 16:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all. Templates "created or improved" with a banner saying that? Surely not. Nigej (talk) 19:24, 16 January 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:420Collaboration2017category[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:39, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This notification is just pointless. Does someone really care that a category was created during an event? Gonnym (talk) 16:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all. Categories "created or improved" with a banner saying that? Clearly not needed. Nigej (talk) 19:25, 16 January 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:420Collaboration2017[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 merge to Template:420 Collaboration talk. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:33, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:420Collaboration2017 with Template:420Collaboration2018.
Not really entirely sure these should be talk page banners, but regardless at the minimum, there does not need to be a new one each year and instead there should be |year= parameter. Gonnym (talk) 16:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A great example of how pointless this is, 420 (cannabis culture) is tagged with all 5 and with {{WikiProject Cannabis}}. Gonnym (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. Article "created or improved" with a banner saying that? Not quite as crazy as the two above but "or improved" is way too nebulous to be useful to anyone. Nigej (talk) 19:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Gonnym, why are the 2017 and 2018 templates nominated for merging? --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a merge nomination as I've explained. I just didn't feel it was needed to spam 5 tags on the same page. Gonnym (talk) 09:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But the rest are nominated for deletion. Why not merge all of them into one template or just nominate 2017 and 2018 for deletion like the rest? --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support merging all these, and the template/category variants, into one template. Bit ridiculous there are 13 templates for one thing. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 11:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why isn't this just merged into the WikiProject banner? czar 17:10, 23 January 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:Reptiles chart[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 14:23, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, incoming links, documentation, or categories. Only edit was creation in 2016. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:46, 16 January 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:Sandboxlinkup[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) 13:46, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. These templates were created in 2020 but are not used. They are overly complex for what they do, and subject to degradation if they are moved to different pages. Better alternatives to each of them are explained at the creator's talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:24, 16 January 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:Paul Di'Anno[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) 13:48, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only 2 links left after redirection Sikonmina (talk) 10:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Not useful for navigation. Nigej (talk) 19:30, 16 January 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:POTD row/styles.css[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 13:45, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The last discussion did not reach a consensus, After two months, it hasn't been used. Q28 (talk) 10:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per previous discussion. I'm sure there are many other templates on the unused list that you can spend your time on that are actually useless. --Izno (talk) 15:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Izno. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:03, 17 January 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:Merseytravel[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) 13:50, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template with only two entries used on only two pages. Made entirely redundant by the much more comprehensive {{Transport in Merseyside}} template. 10mmsocket (talk) 10:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. 2 links is not enough for a navigation template. Gonnym (talk) 11:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. per above. Also note per WP:NAVBOX "external links should not be included in navigation templates" Nigej (talk) 19:32, 16 January 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:United States gubernatorial elections in 1800s and two sibling 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) 13:50, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. These templates duplicate the more comprehensive {{United States gubernatorial elections}}, which has 163 transclusions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:56, 16 January 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:United States SA[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) 14:18, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 August 11#Articles featured on portals templates * Pppery * it has begun... 03:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. These banners are really not a big feat (or really a feat) that should be plastered on talk pages. As it stands, I can create a portal about anything and select any article which would have just as much merit as these. Gonnym (talk) 11:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. I never understood what an editor was supposed to do with this information. If important, could consider wrapping into {{article history}} but I think that's a stretch if there's no need to track/show this at all. Either way, talk page banner blindness is real and hopefully this can free some screen real estate. czar 07:20, 17 January 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_January_16&oldid=1083388404"