Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 December 2

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

December 2 edit

Template:Strife 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) ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 22:30, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Only two albums and one member have articles. WP:NENAN. 212.135.65.247 (talk) 15:33, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 23:49, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, the articles can be easily connected through a "see also" section. Frietjes (talk) 15:08, 7 December 2019 (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:Arcade 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 2019 December 12. (non-admin closure) — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 12:03, 12 December 2019 (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:KGC 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 2019 December 12. (non-admin closure) — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 12:03, 12 December 2019 (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:Line 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 redirect to Template:Line link. (non-admin closure) ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 22:29, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Line with Template:Dialogue.
Never used, see the What Links Here. Also redundant to {{dialogue}}. dibbydib 💬/✏ 22:53, 2 December 2019 (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:2018 Liga Sudamericana Group D 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) 00:00, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

unused after being merged with the parent article (with attribution) per consensus in prior deletion discussions and at WT:FOOTY. Frietjes (talk) 19:21, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 11:40, 3 December 2019 (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:Purcell operas 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) 00:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

rarely used and duplicates navigation found in Template:Henry Purcell, which is more widely used. Frietjes (talk) 18:56, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I'm the creator of this template. Sometime later, we (Wikipedia:WikiProject Opera) have created other format of template for Opera navigation list - template at the bottom of all opera articles, instead of on top right. This template is now redundant. - Jay (talk) 04:12, 3 December 2019 (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 PBA team 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:04, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

this template was being used on about 5 pages before I replaced it with the standard {{infobox basketball club}}, so it is no longer needed. Frietjes (talk) 17:32, 2 December 2019 (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:Get italic link 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:04, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 16:52, 2 December 2019 (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:Automatic taxobox/doc/children 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) 00:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

unused and marked as obsolete Frietjes (talk) 16:10, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete My fault; in Jan. 2017 I marked it as obsolete with the edit comment "clarify that this is obsolete; can be deleted later" but then never got round to nominating it for deletion. (For the record, the code it documents relied on a bot running, which doesn't run now, and anyway wouldn't work because the prevalence of "variant" and "skip" taxonomy templates means that taxonomy templates that have the same parent aren't always children of that parent and certainly aren't all the children. For example, the skip taxonomy template for Archosauria has Sauropsida as its parent, but it's not a child.) Peter coxhead (talk) 17:08, 2 December 2019 (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:RTD Bus & Rail 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 merge to Template:RTD stations navbox. (non-admin closure) ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 22:26, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This template is redundant to Template:RTD stations navbox, which is already in the same articles. –Dream out loud (talk) 14:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The template was improved during this TfD by reverting the unexplained deletion of most of its content. Of course, that doesn't stop it being redundant. Certes (talk) 14:29, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge with Template:RTD stations navbox. Frietjes (talk) 15:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment if any of the templates maintainers reads this and cares. Both templates have multiple issues regarding duplicate links and linking to sections of the same article. A link should appear only once in a navbox. A navbox is not here to replace a list or an article, and is not here to explain this thoroughly or give an overview. It's here to provide navigation. Adding duplicate links makes the template larger for no valid reason. The station template also has a serious issue with color WP:ACCESSIBILITY. Links should be blue, not white and with the black background color, even the underline is barely noticeable. --Gonnym (talk) 16:10, 7 December 2019 (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:Center Parcs 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) ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 13:55, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Les Bois-Francs I've boldly redirected several other unreferenced stubs that compromise the entirety of this template to Center Parcs Europe. Given that not a single entry remains, I think this template should be deleted. A list in the article may be useful, but there is no apparent need for a navigational template full or redirects to the same target. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:07, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, now provides no navigation between articles. Frietjes (talk) 15:02, 7 December 2019 (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:J. G. Quintel 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) 22:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Too small per WP:NAV-WITHIN. Unlikely go grow substantially. Already have {{Regular Show}}. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:07, 2 December 2019 (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/2019_December_2&oldid=1090622101"