Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 24

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< November 23 November 25 >

November 24 edit

Template:BART Blue Line Sunday 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 the template's undeletion. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and the Dublin/Pleasanton–Daly City line already has a route map. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:52, 24 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:Pinnaroo railway line (SA) RDT 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 Template:Pinnaroo railway line. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:33, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Pinnaroo railway line (SA) RDT with Template:Pinnaroo railway line.
The templates are effectively similar (duplicate), with the exception for one template using sidings and the other template using station icons. If the merge goes ahead, I will move the merged template to include (SA) because I will create a template for the Victoria Pinnaroo Railway Line. Train of Knowledge (Talk) 23:33, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge One template is better than two for the same subject. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:06, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge: Sensible and logical. I didn't realise way back when I created the new template that an old one existed. ~~
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:Cameron Highlands Labelled Map 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) 17:34, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused maps and not needed anywhere. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:31, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as still unused after 1 week. Template:Cameron Highlands Labelled Map was the only one added to an article but its inclusion looks awful and messes up the entire page. So I support deleting that one also. Gonnym (talk) 10:20, 3 December 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:Cambodian Provinces Image Map 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) 17:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All unused maps and not needed anywhere. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:09, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as still unused after 1 week. Gonnym (talk) 10:03, 3 December 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 Fungi Collaboration 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 moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi/Fungi Collaboration/Template Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:38, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template, part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi/Fungi Collaboration, now marked as historical. No reasonable chance of future use. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:26, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • (shrugs) weak keep....ideally one day if the project is more active it'd be great to resurrect this. As this is not clogging article space and wikipedia ain't paper, I see no reason to delete. I'm not gonna cry in my beer if deleted however. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 18:59, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:47, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. This can be undeleted in the unlikely event that the defunct-since-2007 collaboration restarts. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:52, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to WP:WikiProject Fungi/Fungi Collaboration/Template for the project's rejuvination per Casliber. As this template doesn't need to reside in template space, and this is a wikiproject specific template, it can reside in the projects subpages -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 02:25, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:27, 24 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:rtl-lang and Template:rtl-para 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 December 4. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:44, 4 December 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:Did you know nominations/Inge Bernstein 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 Maile66 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 21:19, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have just realised this article is too old for DYK eligibility; self-nominated deletion. —AFreshStart (talk) 15:45, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Done — Maile (talk) 19:50, 24 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 US Supreme court cases 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. Izno (talk) 20:18, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, seemingly redundant to Template:Infobox US Supreme Court case. Hog Farm Talk 14:58, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • This would have been a Speedy Delete per the former speedy T3 criterion. TFD is a formality in this case. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:00, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:25, 24 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:Tara Kemp track listing 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. Izno (talk) 20:18, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, could possibly only ever be used in one article, and a prose list is used there instead. Hog Farm Talk 14:49, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:25, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: redundant, the album article already has a track listing in the main body of the text, and this track listing can't be used on any other article. Richard3120 (talk) 20:59, 30 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:(S1) 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. Izno (talk) 20:20, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 13#Template:R1, the S-phrase templates in Category:S-phrase templates should be deprecated, placed in Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell, replaced with relevant P phrases and deleted when unused.

Pinging previous discussion participents: User:Tom (LT), User:Graeme Bartlett, User:DePiep, User:Izno, User:Jonesey95 and closer User:Primefac. Gonnym (talk) 10:25, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • They have already been tagged for deletion for a while. They have already been deprecated for years. They should have been discussed along with R1, but I think the nomination was not adequate to list the affected templates. I support the idea to replace by P phrases, and I am about the only one doing that job. However deleting will make a mess in the history of all the most important chemical articles, including ethanol. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:44, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I note that replacement with GHS phrases is an expert job, not an algorithm. User:Graeme Bartlett is working on this (petcan check: from 572 on Nov 1st down to 332 today :-). IOW, the pen process is patient, fine. -DePiep (talk) 08:38, 30 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:Cross-wiki user 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 December 4. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:45, 4 December 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:100 Most Common Family Names in Mainland China 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 December 1. Izno (talk) 20:21, 1 December 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:Usercat 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 redirect to Template:User category. Izno (talk) 00:34, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pity that no one uses it now. Q28 left a message at 00:07, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You could use it, and then it wouldn't be orphaned :-) --Trovatore (talk) 04:38, 24 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:Lowercase title/old 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. History merged as requested. Izno (talk) 00:37, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is no longer used. -- Q28 left a message at 00:05, 24 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:WelcomeMessage 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. Izno (talk) 00:31, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a welcome template but no longer in use. Q28 left a message at 00:04, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - better to centralize to a smaller number of welcome templates which can be kept up to date with the latest resources as Template:Welcome is. Also the look of that template is very dated. User:GKFXtalk 19:32, 26 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 of the Armée de l'Air 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. Izno (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I noticed is that this template is not being used. Q28 left a message at 00:03, 24 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_24&oldid=1058614173"