Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 September 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< September 28 September 30 >

September 29[edit]

Template:Seventh-day Adventist camps of North America[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:46, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox with no main article, no transclusions, and no links to articles that are about the nominal navbox topic. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:50, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete I redirected all of the Seventh-day Adventist Church camp articles for not being notable. And I don't think Seventh-day Adventist Church camps will never be notable. Catfurball (talk) 19:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:08, 1 October 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:T2demo[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 G6 by Reaper Eternal (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 21:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, incoming links, or documentation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:47, 29 September 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:Alba Fehérvár by season[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:47, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only one link. Fails navigation. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:16, 29 September 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:Al-Wahda SC sections[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:48, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two links. The template isn't necessary as on both articles for the respective Al-Wahda SC clubs there exists a sidebar type box that has the same two links as part of the article. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:12, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete makes sense to me, template is kind of worthless. Catfurball (talk) 15:08, 1 October 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:Userbox sample compact[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[the template] has just one transclusion on an old sandbox. It could be substed and deleted – quote from Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 22#Template:Userbox sample. I agree with Jonesey95 and propose deletion. —⁠andrybak (talk) 18:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. This was an experiment from 2006 that has become a maintenance burden, as can be seen from the template's history. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:27, 30 September 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:2009 Team Speedway Polish Championship[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No longer used. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete makes sense to me, no need to keep anymore. Catfurball (talk) 15:10, 1 October 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:1991 Sweden WRWC[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No links. Created back in May. If the creator is working on the links to be created, I think it's best to be moved to a subpage of the creator until it has at least five links. That way the creator can work on creating the articles on his own time. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:07, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Per nom. None of the players in the template would pass WP:NRU and would unlikely pass WP:GNG anyway unless they are notable for other things. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:50, 30 September 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:Agarest[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:52, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Three links. Fails NENAN. All the links link to each other through the articles already. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete makes sense to me, seems to be a worthless template. Catfurball (talk) 15:11, 1 October 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:Colombian Presidential Line of Succession[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:54, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think this fails WP:NENAN, and is more problematic than useful. Sure, it has plenty of links. But if you navigate to any of those links for the people or for the ministries, it doesn't give any context of how they are related to any other minister or ministries regarding the Presidential order of succession... I don't think the template does the job it was created for. The only way you would know the line of succession is by simply looking at the navbox itself, and the existing list article Colombian presidential line of succession both explains and handles this better than a navbox. The addition of the ministers' names in the template is also a problem as this makes it a dynamic template – ministers come and go, so not only would this navbox itself have to be continually updated, the navbox would also have to be continually added or removed from the articles for all the politicians as they come and go from government. If you remove the names from the template to avoid this work, it effectively becomes a list of Colombian ministries, and {{Ministries of Colombia}} already exists, so this template becomes redundant. Richard3120 (talk) 14:34, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. The article Colombian presidential line of succession should be the one to be continuously updated when changes to the government happen. And most or sometimes there aren't articles for each and every minister of the Colombian government which would make the navbox counterproductive to its purpose for navigation. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:58, 1 October 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:Anandhisocrates on Instagram[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted by Reaper Eternal (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not an actual template. Substed at Anandhi. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 11:06, 29 September 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:Wards of Renfrewshire[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 06:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articles within template have now been merged and are now just redirects, and template no longer exists on any pages Crowsus (talk) 05:10, 29 September 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_September_29&oldid=1114529248"