Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 August 2

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

August 2 edit

Template:Tashkent 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. Izno (talk) 20:53, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused map. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:45, 2 August 2023 (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:RCTS-LocosLNER-10A 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 2023 August 18. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:34, 18 August 2023 (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:Graph:Seattle Sounders FC (MLS) seasons 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 00:21, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused map. We don't need graphs for seasons for teams. This type of information would on the related pages for said team. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:43, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete It was poor form IMO to nominate a Graph template for deletion while the Graph extension was still broken, since it could well have become unused as a result of that. However, in this case it comes down to the graph being removed by an IP in 2021 without explanation, and thus we fall back on my usual principle of not using TfD to resurrect templates abandoned through the natural course of editing, and instead reflecting what has already happened. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:43, 7 August 2023 (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:Doctor Who planets 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 00:22, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Following Vortis' recent redirect, this navbox only contains Gallifrey and Skaro, which discuss each other heavily in both articles. There's not much reason to keep this navbox when it only has two things inside of it. Pokelego999 (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2023 (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:List of oxidation states of the elements/datacheck 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. Moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements/List of oxidation states of the elements/datacheck. Izno (talk) 20:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. This appears to be some kind of information page. It should probably be incorporated into documentation or moved to an appropriate WikiProject subpage. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is a tool to verify consistency of data. YBG (talk) 20:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:41, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move to project space if it is useful. Template pages are supposed to be used via transclusion or substitution (with the usual exceptions for sandboxes, testcases, and the like). – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:37, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Move to project space per Jonesey95. Gonnym (talk) 10:34, 7 August 2023 (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:Unicode chart Specials 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 Normally these sorts of templates are deleted at TfD, but this discussion clearly shows enough of a consensus to make an exception. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:03, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Single-article content with no template parameters. Subst into article and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:15, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: There are templates for each Unicode block. To remove this one creates an exception and makes maintenance and review more difficult. DRMcCreedy (talk) 04:46, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: These templates exist for every Unicode block, this one is not different Spitzak (talk) 14:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 16:48, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It may make sense to de-template *all* the charts simultaneously, but that is a lot of work. The templates have made it easy to find these for doing edits that should be applied to all of them. Spitzak (talk) 16:53, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it doesn't make sense to do that. Many of the Unicode charts are transcluded in multiple places, so they couldn't be de-templated without an absolute mess on our hands. And then we'd be back where we were a dozen years ago where this content was an absolute nightmare to update and maintain. Working out how to end that living nightmare is how we came to have this exhaustive and cohesive set of Unicode chart templates. I vehemently oppose subst-ing any Unicode block template, let alone all of them. We still have a lot of potential development of these templates, not to mention regular yearly updates, and scattering them to the winds is a terrible idea. VanIsaac, GHTV contWpWS 17:56, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: It's working as is. Templates exist for each Unicode block already, and this eliminates the need to have to copy and paste the same table over and over again. Deleting this template breaks this consistency. DASL51984 (Speak to me!) 23:06, 2 August 2023 (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:Geobox 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 G4 by Izno (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 19:23, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent attempt to reconstruct Geobox, which was deprecated and deleted in 2018. Did not propose speedy deletion, because unsure whether this is identical to the template that was deleted. — hike395 (talk) 08:40, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added {{Geobox 0}}, another attempt at this. —Bruce1eetalk 09:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

speedy delete, definitely an attempt to raise the dead. Frietjes (talk) 14:46, 2 August 2023 (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:Unicode 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 relisted on 2023 August 18. Primefac (talk) 12:06, 18 August 2023 (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:Carlos Toshiki 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 Pppery (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:04, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I created the template for this artist because I had intended to create articles on all the singles and albums, but most of them didn't meet notability guidelines (the pages for Emotion – Migigawa no Heart-tachi e, Alquimist, and Carlos were redirected). The only page that was left was the one for "Yoakemade Borderless", but I redirected it because it also didn't meet notability guidelines. Now with no articles from the artist's discography, I don't think the template should still exist as it only has related articles with a band and people in said band, which already has another template. reppoptalk 03:55, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tag it under G7 since you created it. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:36, 2 August 2023 (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:Witchcraft sidebar 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 2023 August 9. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:12, 9 August 2023 (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/2023_August_2&oldid=1171001867"