Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 September 2

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< September 1 September 3 >

September 2 edit

Template:Content copied 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 Speedy delete. Author request. Hut 8.5 21:10, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Templates that duplicate the bare minimum of {{Copied}} and {{Merged-from}} (respectively) without any of the important details to provide the required attribution. Redirects were reverted, hence the TFD. Primefac (talk) 20:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect Delete: Reading over it I realized it not what I first thought it was, they are indeed the same (just simpler redundant versions). – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 20:12, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because they aren't used and I'm the author I'll add G7 speedy deletion. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 21:00, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete/Redirect unnecessary duplication of {{copied}}, though I think just linking the article is actually enough for the require attribution - per WP:COPYWITHIN, "At minimum, this means providing an edit summary at the destination page – that is, the page into which the material is copied – stating that content was copied, together with a link to the source (copied-from) page" Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:13, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep #2: {{Merged-from}} says the contents implying the entire page was merged into the page, where as {{Content moved}} says that the content on the page was moved to a different page. Two totally different things. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 21:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're right: they're both duplicates of {{copied}}. Updated the nomination accordingly. Primefac (talk) 13:05, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Userfy all of this and everything like it until a proposal passes to support its usage. I have cleaned up things related to this ordeal, and it appears Bsherr and Primefac have as well from looking at the creator's talk page. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 15:30, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd not like this in my user space, thank you. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 21:00, 5 September 2018 (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:ISO 3166 code-3 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: keep the three listed templates, with the sub-pages relisted on 2018 September 10. Primefac (talk) 02:28, 10 September 2018 (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 Shinto shrine 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 relisted on 2018 September 9. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:01, 9 September 2018 (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 Medieval Scottish Diocese 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 relisted on 2018 September 9. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:00, 9 September 2018 (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 monastery 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 keep as separate templates Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:33, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox monastery with Template:Infobox church.
Pretty redundant, it seems to me. Any deviating variable(s) could then be merged. A second merge destination alternative would be Template:Infobox religious building. By the way, Template:Infobox church should probably be rename to Template:Infobox church building for better precision, especially after that possible merge. Chicbyaccident (talk) 16:07, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Monasteries aren't necessarily churches. Christian ones often contain buildings with altars, or oratories, but that's different. They certainly aren't just church buildings. As an example Durham Priory was a monastery, but you wouldn't call it a church and it's not really a church building either. Why the rationing here? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 16:21, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Apart from Christian monasteries being different from churches, the word monastery is also used for several other religions, including Buddhism. The word church, on the other hand, is much more connected with and limited to Christian connotations.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:48, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Church implies christian, monastery is a pretty separate matter. Although it is a bit redundant English has consistently made this distinction.
  • Oppose For obvious reasons stated above. scope_creep (talk) 11:32, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • no per the last time you wanted to move church to church building. Frietjes (talk) 15:22, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose For reasons stated above. Ergo Sum 04:53, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I concur with the above reasons, but wanted to voice my opposition. Farragutful (talk) 20:02, 7 September 2018 (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:Episcopal succession 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 relisted on 2018 September 9. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:00, 9 September 2018 (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 Anglican province 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 keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:00, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox Anglican province with Template:Infobox Christian denomination.
Redundancy. Either there of Template:Infobox diocese. As was with the case of the defunct Template:Infobox Christian church body (although this merge still needs some help to finished, now long time still after its decision). Chicbyaccident (talk) 16:00, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose This is a completely different type of thing. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 20:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]
  • Oppose – As Rich Farmbrough points out, an ecclesiastical province is not a denomination. (Note: The usage of the word province here does not refer specifically to the autocephalous churches of the Anglican Communion, commonly described as "provinces of the Anglican Communion". Rather, it refers to what are sometimes called "internal provinces".) 142.160.89.97 (talk) 21:31, 5 September 2018 (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:MBTA-railway-routemap 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:55, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:10, 2 September 2018 (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:MLS Cup 2004 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:55, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and I didn't see any other MLS Cup squad navboxes Frietjes (talk) 15:10, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete we do not create this kind of specific navbox Hhkohh (talk) 09:36, 3 September 2018 (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:MLS Reserve Division seasons 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:55, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, all redirects Frietjes (talk) 15:09, 2 September 2018 (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:MMA statsbox3 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:55, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused infobox Frietjes (talk) 15:08, 2 September 2018 (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:MLS map 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:59, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, replaced by Template:MLS labeled map Frietjes (talk) 15:08, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete/Redirect Older version and not used, but make it a shortcut by adding a redirect. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 20:45, 2 September 2018 (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:MY-railway-routemap 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:07, 2 September 2018 (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:Manila imagemap 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and duplicates the map in Manila#Barangays and Districts Frietjes (talk) 15:05, 2 September 2018 (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:Map of Countries of the United Kingdom 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 relisted on 2018 September 9. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:56, 9 September 2018 (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:Map of American English (simple) 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 speedy delete per G7. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 10:25, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:03, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: originator who no longer sees any use for this. Wolfdog (talk) 15:34, 2 September 2018 (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:Map of Crimea - extreme points 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and could be replaced by a standard {{location map}} if needed Frietjes (talk) 15:03, 2 September 2018 (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:Map of Iranian 2012 Olympics Medals 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:59, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and not clear where this would be used Frietjes (talk) 14:28, 2 September 2018 (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:Map of Saint Lucia 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and duplicates the map already in Quarters of Saint Lucia Frietjes (talk) 14:27, 2 September 2018 (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:Map of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and duplicates the map already in Geography of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Frietjes (talk) 14:26, 2 September 2018 (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:Map of the Republic of Macedonia 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and not clear where it would be used Frietjes (talk) 14:26, 2 September 2018 (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:Margareth Tomanek W55 Record 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:53, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 14:24, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete As creator of the template, this record has been superseded and the method of posting has been improved. Trackinfo (talk) 14:58, 2 September 2018 (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:Markazi Province Map 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and generally duplicates the maps in the main article Frietjes (talk) 14:24, 2 September 2018 (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:8TeamBracket-2-groups 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 14:21, 2 September 2018 (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:2017–18 National League 1 Table 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:35, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused fork of Template:2017–18 National League 1 Frietjes (talk) 14:17, 2 September 2018 (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:2017–18 I-League 2nd Division – second-placed teams 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:40, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, incomplete, and no reason why it couldn't be added to 2017–18 I-League 2nd Division directly. Frietjes (talk) 14:14, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete seems an abandoned template Hhkohh (talk) 09:39, 3 September 2018 (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:2017-18 Kuala Lumpur Super League table 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:35, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused fork of Template:2017–18 Kuala Lumpur Super League table Frietjes (talk) 14:12, 2 September 2018 (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:2016 Summer Olympics football game documentation 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete a non-standard template. We should not use this kind of template/format in IOC Hhkohh (talk) 09:42, 3 September 2018 (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:2016 PLA team map 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and could be added directly to Premier League of America if the map is necessary. Frietjes (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2018 (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:2016 European Wheelchair Handball Nations’ Tournament Netherlands team roster 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, all redlinks, and could be merged with Netherlands national wheelchair handball team if the content is important. Frietjes (talk) 14:07, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete seems a non-notable template Hhkohh (talk) 10:23, 3 September 2018 (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:2015–16 SHL Labelled Map 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:36, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and duplicates the maps in 2015–16 SHL season and 2016–17 SHL season Frietjes (talk) 14:04, 2 September 2018 (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:2015 Golden Lions Currie Cup squad 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 withdrawn Frietjes (talk) 15:19, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 14:03, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, template now being used. TheMightyPeanut (talk) 20:46, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep Frietjes using now, please consider withdraw this nomination Hhkohh (talk) 10:13, 3 September 2018 (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:2015 GLPL team map 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, and no reason why this needs to be in a separate template since it would only be used in the parent season article (which is currently a redirect). Frietjes (talk) 14:02, 2 September 2018 (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:2015 American film awards 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused. could be moved to userspace until there is consensus to create these for every year. Frietjes (talk) 14:00, 2 September 2018 (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:2011 Indonesia Super League U-21 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

not particularly useful, given the lack of season-specific links. having these for every season would add some serious bloat to the foot of the main team articles. Frietjes (talk) 13:23, 2 September 2018 (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:2012 Indonesia Super League U-21 finalists 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused and given the lack of season-specific links, it duplicates information found in the parent article Frietjes (talk) 13:21, 2 September 2018 (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:2008-09 CMISL Standings 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

single-use template, should be merged with the parent article and then deleted Frietjes (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • subst then delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 10:15, 3 September 2018 (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:2009-10 CMISL Standings 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:53, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused, incomplete, and duplicates the table in 2010 Canadian Major Indoor Soccer League season Frietjes (talk) 13:17, 2 September 2018 (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:2002 World Rally Championship season 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:52, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 13:06, 2 September 2018 (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:National anthems of Serbia 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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:52, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Himna Kraljevine Jugoslavije" and "Hej, Sloveni" were anthems of Yugoslavia (and Serbia and Montenegro), never of Serbia. Serbia has ever had only one anthem, "Bože pravde". Thus, this template is useless. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:07, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:10, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. "National anthem" in this instance means that of a sovereign state. See NCMI– Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 06:18, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Illegitimate Barrister. It has more than one entry, and presents the progressive history. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:28, 2 September 2018 (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 Dax squad 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 relisted on 2018 September 9. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:59, 9 September 2018 (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:Braxton Family Values 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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:52, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Braxton Family Values with Template:The Braxtons.
I really think we should merge the Braxton Family Values one to The Braxton one like this. Beyoncetan 2 (talk) 06:47, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Have also added the {{Tfm}} notice to the templates, which Beyoncetan 2, you should do when nominating something for merging
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merge - One is about the family, one is about the TV show. It may be kind of fulky to combine the two. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:56, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose merge: Two different things, per above. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 19:16, 9 September 2018 (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 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 keep. Mz7 (talk) 05:26, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Al with Template:La.
They do the exact same thing and just look slightly different. Most xl pages have brackets or something around them. Where as lx pages are links with extra links after, such as: (edit|talk|history). Because of that, it makes more sense to merge Template:al into Template:la. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 17:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep {{Al}} provides links to the article talk page history whereas {{la}} does not. So they are different. {{Al}} is used 47K times, so if you were to redo {{la}} to add a parameter for the talk page history or some such thing, you would have to do 47K replacements, which seems pretty useless. --B (talk) 16:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:04, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Different purposes require different links. These types of templates routinely cause tranclusion limit excessions. Attempting to have a one-size-fits-all solution will make this worse. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:46, 2 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]
  • Keep for now, many existing uses, some likely intentional. —PaleoNeonate – 23:22, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. They do not do exactly the same thing; La provides some more links (to links, logs, and watchlist) and this extra information is used widely in AfDs. So the merge rationale is invalid. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:29, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep they do slightly different things and I don't see any value to a merge. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:28, 6 September 2018 (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:Thank-You-Changing-Note 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Old unused welcome template. TheDragonFire (talk) 07:30, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • How do you know it's unused? Templates like this are always subst'd. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]
    Searching for the template text in the User talk namespace returns nothing. If you'd prefer though, we can redirect to {{W-graphical}} and call it a day. TheDragonFire (talk) 06:07, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per nom. if someone wants to redirect it, that's fine as well. Frietjes (talk) 13:31, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per above. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 19:14, 9 September 2018 (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:Miles 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:39, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary duplication of {{convert}}. Primefac (talk) 03:48, 2 September 2018 (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:Migrate to 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 speedy delete. Requested by creator, no !votes for keeping the page. Primefac (talk) 10:52, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template is functionally duplicate to {{Merge portions from}} but uses language invented by the template creator ("migrated") to break from the long-used "split and merge". Redirect was overturned, so to TFD we go. Primefac (talk) 03:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as a remnant of a recent, quickly reverted move ("migration" is not part of the vocab in this wiki field, and the word is misleading as it implies a larger-scale, more complicated process than the split/merge operations that the template indicates), or redirect if the creator is keen on using it as a shortcut. – Uanfala (talk) 11:31, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect I'll just make it a redirect until something can be figured out. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 14:29, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete: Since it's unused and I've decided it's not needed and useless and meets the guidelines for G7 speedy deletion I added G7 speedy delete to the page. – BrandonXLF (t@lk) 22:35, 5 September 2018 (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:Techstars companies 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:38, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary & promotional template. The list of notable alumni is already included at Techstars#Alumni_companies and this is sufficient. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:19, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, excessive. the relationship between the various alumni is weak, so a simple pair of links between the Techstars article and the various articles is enough. Frietjes (talk) 13:00, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete better done with a list and a cat. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:42, 2 September 2018 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete per nom; unnecessary and promotional. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:28, 6 September 2018 (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/2018_September_2&oldid=858856517"