Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 11 November 13 >

November 12[edit]

Template:Bates symphonies[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⚡ 19:10, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Redundant to Template:Mason Bates; if Bates had written as many symphonies as Haydn, then maybe this template would be needed, but he has/did not. Aza24 (talk) 22:57, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:31, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Not necessary. Waddles 🗩 🖉 04:51, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I made it before creating several other pages on his works, thus necessitating a broader template. Jg2904 (talk) 05:02, 13 November 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:Glass symphonies[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 00:19, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Redundant to Template:Philip Glass; if Glass had written as many symphonies as Haydn, then maybe this template would be needed, but he has/did not. Aza24 (talk) 22:54, 12 November 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:Energy portal fact[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 00:28, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Talk pages are primarily for discussing improvements to articles. I don't see how notifying readers that an article's DYK is included in a portal is anything but cruft. We need to avoid banner blindness and templates like these are part of the problem. Aza24 (talk) 22:16, 12 November 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:Africa football portal selected[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 00:35, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Talk pages are primarily for discussing improvements to articles. I don't see how notifying readers that an article is included in a portal is anything but cruft. We need to avoid banner blindness and templates like these are part of the problem. Aza24 (talk) 22:16, 12 November 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:Philosophy Portal Selected Philosopher[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 00:09, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Template is not used anymore as the 'philosophy portal featured candidates' process is no longer functioning. See Portal:Philosophy/Selected philosopher/Suggest, nothing has happened there for 10 years. Aza24 (talk) 22:14, 12 November 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:Philosophy Portal Selected Article[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 00:09, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Template is not used anymore as the 'philosophy portal featured candidates' process is no longer functioning. See Portal:Philosophy/Selected philosopher/Suggest, nothing has happened there for 10 years. Aza24 (talk) 22:14, 12 November 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:Philosophy Portal Featured Philosopher[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 00:09, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Template is not used anymore as the 'philosophy portal featured candidates' process is no longer functioning. See Portal:Philosophy/Selected philosopher/Suggest, nothing has happened there for 10 years. Aza24 (talk) 22:14, 12 November 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:Philosophy Portal Featured Article[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 00:09, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Template is not used anymore as the 'philosophy portal featured candidates' process is no longer functioning. See Portal:Philosophy/Selected philosopher/Suggest, nothing has happened there for 10 years. Aza24 (talk) 22:13, 12 November 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:Music Portal Featured Article[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 00:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Unhelpful cruft that does nothing but fill up the talk page. No one cares if Beethoven's article was featured on the Music portal 10 years ago... Aza24 (talk) 22:11, 12 November 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:Music Portal Featured Candidate[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 00:45, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Template is not used anymore as the 'music portal featured candidates' process is no longer functioning. See Portal:Music/Featured articles/Suggest, nothing has happened there for 10 years. Aza24 (talk) 22:09, 12 November 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:History Portal Featured Candidate[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 00:46, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion. Template is not used anymore as the 'history portal featured candidates' process is no longer functioning. See Portal:History/Featured article/Suggest, nothing has happened there for 10 years. Aza24 (talk) 22:08, 12 November 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:Playing cards/core[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 00:10, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused after being merged (by me) with Template:Playing cards Frietjes (talk) 19:42, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I've also edited the template and reformatted the layout by removing all the non-linked text as most of the cards will never have an article and the navbox should be used to link to related articles. If a table of the 52 card names is wanted, it should be in the article, not in the navbox. Gonnym (talk) 20:33, 12 November 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:US Census tract embedded[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 00:10, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 19:30, 12 November 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:Infobox snooker player 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:28, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely to ever get used, as no single player is going to have a season where they are independently notable. Such articles have already been removed. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Was previously deleted at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 October 16#Template:Infobox snooker player season. Gonnym (talk) 20:37, 12 November 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:Urban agglomerations in India[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 relisted on 2021 November 20. ✗plicit 00:11, 20 November 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:Paris Metro/header line[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 00:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

no longer used Frietjes (talk) 18:55, 12 November 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:Timeline of the Lewis and Clark Expedition[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 Timeline of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:22, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a lot of stuff to be in a navbox and is adding references outside of the reference section as well as a phantom blue line in mobile view. Given that we already have a Timeline of the Lewis and Clark Expedition article, I suggest merging any missing content there and using standard "see also" linking to link to Timeline of the Lewis and Clark Expedition instead. Frietjes (talk) 18:09, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If the one advocating deletion wants to merge any missing content to Timeline of the Lewis and Clark Expedition I'll have no objection. It would have been more appropriate to determine if there was indeed any missing content in the first place before nominating the template for deletion. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As a side note, and sorry for the bluntness here, this template should have never have been created. Timeline of the Lewis and Clark Expedition was created in 2004, this template 8 years later. The template is a huge piece of text which is obviously article content and is misused as a navbox, which it clearly isn't. Gonnym (talk) 20:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Times of creation isn't grounds for deletion. Used as a nav-box is also an opinion, which could be said of the article, which also includes many links. Also, there are a good number of dates, names and links listed in the template that are not included in the article. Including:

  • May 16: The Corps of Discovery arrives at St. Charles, Missouri.
  • May 24: Pass Boones Settlement. Home of famous woodsman L. Willenborg.
  • May 25: The expedition passes the small village of La Charrette on the Missouri River. Charles Floyd writes in his journal that this is "the last settlement of whites on this river".
  • June 1: The expedition reaches the Osage River.
  • June 12: Lewis and Clark meet three trappers in two pirogues. One of the men was Pierre Dorion, Jr.—who knew George Rogers Clark. Lewis and Clark persuade Dorion to return to Sioux camp to act as interpreter.
  • January 1: The Corps of Discovery celebrates the New Year by "Two discharges of cannon and Musick—a fiddle, tambereen and a sounden horn."

Looking forward, there are many other items, names and links missing in the article. To be fair to the discussion, however, there are few items listed in the article not included in the template. i.e. Items under 1803 are missing in the template, as the template only concerns itself with 1804, which is when the expedition departed. In any case, our major concern should be the readers, not whether the template is being used as a nav-box, or when it may have been created. I'll wait and see if anyone here shares this concern and is willing to move the content in question to the article. If all one wants to do is make a deletion and move on, then obviously that responsibility will be passed off on me. It's a bit disappointing to see that there was only a proposal to delete, not a proposal to merge. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:20, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Times of creation wasn't the reason I stated for deletion, it was just a comment made to note one of the incorrect things that lead to this template being created. Used as a nav-box is also an opinion - You either did not write what you meant to write, or your statement is completely incorrect. Template:Timeline of the Lewis and Clark Expedition used until Plastikspork's edit yesterday the class "navbox" meaning this template was a navbox, not an opinion, a fact. Finally, regarding missing information. I'm not supporting a merge, as I have no idea what piece of information in a barely-watched template is correct (as they are mostly unreferenced). if there are missing statement, then add them to the article. Gonnym (talk) 09:25, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. Gonnym, re your above quote: "You either did not write what you meant to write, or your statement is completely incorrect." "or"? This doesn't make sense. You're saying if I didn't intend to write what I said then it's correct. In any case, the template can be used as a nav-box, or can can be used as a general reference and a time line, per the title of the template -- in bold letters. You can cite all the dates/times of edits, guidelines and quotes you like, the choice is still up to the readers. If you don't know what belongs in the template or the article then I'd reserve any further opinion as to whether you support any merging or not. Its content, if missing in the article, can indeed be merged if the events are notable, and are supported by reliable sources, which they are. If you can give us any viable and pressing reason why the template should be deleted, rather than merged we'd like to hear about it. Thank you. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 17:31, 14 November 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:WikiProject Islam focus[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 00:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 16:59, 12 November 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:Action(Italy)/meta/shortname[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 00:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely and unused misspelling of {{Action (Italy)/meta/shortname}}; no worth in redirecting. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:46, 12 November 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:Are Parish[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 00:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abandoned and unused template for parish that ceased to exist in 2017. The template Template:Tori Parish is now in use on all applicable pages. Newshunter12 (talk) 14:50, 12 November 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:Netball invite[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 relisted on 2021 November 20. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:21, 20 November 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:New Zealand welcome[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 relisted on 2021 November 20. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:21, 20 November 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:New decade header[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) 14:28, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both unused and not needed. Not sure where these could be used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. @WikiCleanerMan: These templates are used every New Year's Day on the articles for the involved years (and, if needed, decades) while the year is changing over. The year changes at different times in different time zones, and these templates automate the updates to keep the articles current hour-to-hour. Please withdraw this nomination. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 02:00, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you give an example of where this is or would be used and how it would be used? Gonnym (talk) 16:24, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiCleanerMan: It will be used on the articles 2021 and 2022 this coming December 31/January 1. This is done every year. If you didn't know what the template was for, you should have asked on the talk page rather than immediately nominating it for deletion. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 21:59, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Antony-22, I didn't ask. Check before you ping. And there is no need to keep templates around for future use. It either has use now or it doesn't. This doesn't. And certainly a one-off template like this isn't needed. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:32, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym and WikiCleanerMan: It is not a one-off, it is used every year. No point in recreating it and deleting it every single year. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 23:38, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really sure I agree with the reasoning for this template. If 2022 has begun somewhere in the world, then 2022 is the current year, regardless of where you are in the world. I find it really bad to have two articles read completely different things for different people. Gonnym (talk) 09:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One could argue that the exact opposite is true, '2022' is not the current year until it's 2022 everywhere; or that, time, being temporal and relative, applies to the reader's locale only. This template does no harm in existing, and saves us 24 hours of edit warring over what is the 'current year' as editors will, in good faith, change both articles back and forth between 'current' and 'previous' based on their own judgment of which is right. Even if we try removing 'current year' entirely from 2021 article we still have the problem of what tense to use when describing it. JeffUK (talk) 12:38, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: That's not quite how it works. Just after midnight in, say, the UTC–4 time zone, 2021 will say "2021 is the current year in parts of the world where the time zone is earlier than UTC–4", with UTC–4 being automatically replaced by the correct time zone every (half) hour. 2022 will say "2022 is the current year in parts of the world where the time zone is UTC–4 or later". Otherwise people have to change it manually every (half) hour to keep it accurate. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 07:17, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One could argue that, and one would be wrong. To take this into more tangible examples, if a film premiered in the United States on the evening of the 18/11, would we say in Australia that it premiered on the 19th? Once something starts, regardless of where in the world it has started, it has started. Gonnym (talk) 08:25, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, because it didn't premiere in Australia at all. An event that happens in a specific location happens at the time in that specific location. That's the whole point. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 20:03, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The templates are used regularly (example); just not in November. We keep plenty of other pages which are used per a schedule but not today, e.g. 364⁄365 of our "on this day" anniversary pages. If it's a problem then we could tick the "must be used" box by transcluding the template always and have it do nothing away from year end, but that just wastes resources. Certes (talk) 15:01, 14 November 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:Nordic world ski championships navigation[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) 14:27, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:37, 12 November 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:Nebula Award template footer[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) 14:27, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:32, 12 November 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:Needchunho[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 undeletion of these templates. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:26, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both unused with no articles needing such attention for these languages. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:32, 12 November 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:Nemzeti Bajnokság II seasons[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 05:57, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The seasons and teamlist templates are superseded Template:Nemzeti Bajnokság II. The rugby union template has only four links which fails the minimum five links needed for a navbox. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:26, 12 November 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:Nemzeti Bajnokság III seasons[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) 14:16, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both are unused and unnecessary. The seasons' and teamlist templates are superseded by Template:Nemzeti Bajnokság III which already has the same list of seasons and teams. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:22, 12 November 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:NeelCodeGen[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) 14:16, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:16, 12 November 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:Neo Democrats LegCo members[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 02:37, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and with only one link outside the template's title. No navigational benefit. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:16, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Even the only link is not a LegCo member now. Sun8908 Talk 09:33, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per Sun8908's comment, this is 100% unneeded now. Waddles 🗩 🖉 04:52, 13 November 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_November_12&oldid=1056232190"