Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 October 15

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< October 14 October 16 >

October 15 edit

Template:Locksmith Animation 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 00:40, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Contains only two actual links (Locksmith Animation and their one film, Ron's Gone Wrong) Trivialist (talk) 23:26, 15 October 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:Apostate wars 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 00:39, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An unused fork of Template:Campaignbox Apostate Wars both of which created by the same user. But nonetheless still redundant. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:24, 15 October 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:All articles with dead external links chart 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. Nom was off the mark here. ✗plicit 00:42, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and don't see why a chart is needed when a category for tracking articles for dead external links already exists. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:12, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, this template is used by User:MusikBot/CategoryCounter approved at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MusikBot 17. The purpose is to track the size of maintenance categories over time so editors interested in those maintenance categories can get a sense of how the category size is changing over time (inspired by the chart at Wikipedia_talk:New_pages_patrol/Reviewers which I believe was also made by User:MusikAnimal). It looks like I set this up intending to display it at Category:All articles with dead external links, but once the data started rolling in I forgot to follow-up. Anyway, if folks don't have a problem with this template's existence, that's my intention. Ajpolino (talk) 03:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That matches my understanding. I believe the primary justification for this TfD is that the template is unused. So long as we make use of it, it should be kept. The chart is useful because it tracks the size of the category over time, which you cannot do without a bot task like this.
There may be similar unused templates created in the future. The reason for this is simply that it's preferred to wait until there's a meaningful amount of data before showing the chart on the category page (or wherever else, as desired). — MusikAnimal talk 13:45, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is now used at my sandbox. After a few more months data I'll add it to the top of Category:All articles with dead external links. Pardon my slow responses, real life has mostly kept me from Wikipedia this week. Ajpolino (talk) 21:27, 22 October 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:Altenheim Subdivision 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 00:39, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and contains only one link. Not useful. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:48, 15 October 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:Alberta Rural 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. ✗plicit 00:39, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:48, 15 October 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:Ahmedabad Metro lines 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 00:38, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both unused since creation. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 15 October 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:Andaman and Nicobar Islands elections 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 00:38, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Full of redirects with only one link to an article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:10, 15 October 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:Alaska Radio Markets 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 00:38, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and just links to other templates of radio stations in Alaska that are used. No purpose to this sticking around. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:10, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:23, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Per nom. Can't disagree there. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:59, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep — The reason the template is unused is because it was removed ([1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]) with no clear evidence that it was supported by consensus. I removed most of these templates from my watchlist (too many edit-warring SPAs unnecessarily meddling in that content area without affecting the widespread lack of substance), so all that escaped my notice. The end result are navboxes which are far more intricate than most of the articles they're transcluded to, and less functional to boot. Perhaps someone from WP:RS wishes to point me in the direction of any discussion leading to consensus that prompted this change? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 10:21, 16 October 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:Airport Rail Link (Bangkok) style 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. 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. ✗plicit 00:36, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:58, 15 October 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:Airline codeshare 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) 23:59, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:56, 15 October 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:AircraftWelcome 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 00:36, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused welcoming template. Not used by Project Aircraft. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is subst only, so it's lack of transclusions (what unused typically means) is irrelevant, but delete anyway, since it doesn't even seem to have been substed since 2007. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:23, 16 October 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 table total fertility rates 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) 15:48, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

single-use table which can be easily merged with the parent article Frietjes (talk) 17:53, 15 October 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:S-line/ARZC left/main and 1,132 other untranscluded subpages of Template:S-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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:58, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating these 1,133 untranscluded subpages of {{S-line}} for deletion. These are all of the untranscluded subpages that have not been edited in 2021. Please see this similar discussion from 2011, and this discussion confirming that these unused templates are unlikely to be used in the future, since the project is moving from {{S-line}} to {{Adjacent stations}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all All one thousand plus are unused and not needed since the project is moving to another style of formatting. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Added complete lists to a TfD subpage. --Gonnym (talk) 18:56, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks. I wasn't sure of the best way to list them here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:33, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:23, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. Gonnym (talk) 10:40, 17 October 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_October_15&oldid=1051356365"