Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 August 17

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 17

[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. (non-admin closure) feminist 04:31, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Only one related article in addition to the main article, which already link to each other without need of the navbox. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 23:29, 17 August 2017 (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).
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 keep. This is clearly not going to be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 02:03, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't understand what purpose this is supposed to serve. This is transcluded on over 300,000 talk pages. If it's supposed to be a more-or-less universal guideline, then just make it a part of the interface of the site (a kind of universal Editnotice) by editing the appropriate bit in the MediaWiki namespace. If it's supposed to be applied to articles which we think will somehow be more frequented by newcomers or which is more prone to back-and-forth bickering, then a more specific template would be appropriate and certainly not require hundreds of thousands of transclusions (e.g. {{Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement}}). See a page like Talk:Scientology where this is just swallowed up in a sea of notices. The notification creep is only exacerbated by this template which just reminds us of things which are always true and don't need to be posted hundreds of thousands of times across the encyclopedia. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 23:17, 17 August 2017 (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).
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 redirect to Template:User fr-1. (non-admin closure) Morphdogwhat did I do now? 02:46, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We have Template:User fr-1. Userfy? XXN, 19:32, 17 August 2017 (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).
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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This navbox has just three working links out of 4kb of text, and the connection between the articles ("merchant ships which carried military cargoes to Syria and Egypt in October and November 1973") is barely relevant. eh bien mon prince (talk) 14:12, 17 August 2017 (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).
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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This massive navbox is used to store article text and has no realistic navigational purposes. eh bien mon prince (talk) 14:09, 17 August 2017 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) feminist 04:31, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 14:00, 17 August 2017 (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).
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. I have deleted this template as the only substantive editor, acknowledging that it is unused and no longer needed. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:49, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 13:58, 17 August 2017 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 10:02, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused, better to navigate by the category (Category:Consolidated city-counties in the United States) Frietjes (talk) 13:56, 17 August 2017 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 10:02, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 13:54, 17 August 2017 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 10:02, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused, it looks like the century categories are using Template:DecadesAndYears US instead. Frietjes (talk) 13:49, 17 August 2017 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) feminist 04:31, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Currently has only one transclusion, and the transclusion is in the "User:" namespace. This template is not linked to Template:Batman, and any functionality this subpage had seems to have been hardcoded into its parent page/template. So, delete as unnecessary. Steel1943 (talk) 06:54, 17 August 2017 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 10:03, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

templates should be linking for a large number of related articles, not just 2. LibStar (talk) 04:52, 17 August 2017 (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).