Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 October 2

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 speedy delete. per G5: Created after RaviVimana was blocked. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 22:57, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The template has almost certainly been created with the only intent of driving traffic to their website airportcodes.aero. A similar template has been created by a sock of the creator (RaviVimana), and has been spammed to more than 50 airport articles. The creator contested a speedy deletion based on the fact that other problematic templates exist. This may be true but is not a reason for us to keep a template linking to a commercial website w/o anything indicating reliability or editorial oversight. – NJD-DE (talk) 21:02, 2 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).
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 October 10. plicit 00:30, 10 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).
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) 13:54, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Single-use. Could be substed. (Kind of a navbox hiding in plain sight but I'm not going to suggest conversion since it's actually tabular unlike most navboxes.) Izno (talk) 20:01, 2 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).
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 speedy delete per author approval Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Izno (talk) 19:41, 2 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).
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) 14:53, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Basically duplicates Template:TVRband while being placed (bizarrely) at the top of the page. Izno (talk) 19:10, 2 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).
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) 14:48, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for this template. It's only used in one article, 2021 Toppserien, and can easily be incorporated into that article in a non-template form. As far as I am aware, there is also consensus not to use templates for league tables. At least I remember a mass deletion of Norwegian football league table templates a few years ago (circa 2018 or 2019). Sørhaug (talk) 14:16, 2 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).
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 04:45, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There has only been one "Barbadian" monarch, i.e., Elizabeth II. This list includes monarchs before 1966, who reigned as "British monarchs", before Barbados got independence. Peter Ormond 💬 04:39, 2 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).