Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
This page is about discussion of templates. For a list of templates used for discussion, see Wikipedia:List of discussion templates.
Find this page confusing? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!
XFD backlog
V Jul Aug Sep Oct Total
CfD 0 1 11 0 12
TfD 0 0 0 0 0
MfD 0 1 8 0 9
FfD 0 1 4 0 5
RfD 0 0 15 4 19
AfD 0 0 0 0 0
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

On this page, the deletion or merging of templates and modules, except as noted below, is discussed.

How to use this page

[edit]

What not to propose for discussion here

[edit]
Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

Stub templates
Stub templates and categories should be listed at Categories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories, unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
Userboxes
Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
Speedy deletion candidates
If the template clearly satisfies a criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{Db-author}}.
Policy or guideline templates
Templates that are associated with particular Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as the speedy deletion templates, cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant guideline.
Template redirects
List at Redirects for discussion.
Moving and renaming
Use Wikipedia:Requested moves.

Reasons to delete a template

[edit]
Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance.
  2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
  3. The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used.
  4. The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and it can't be fixed through normal editing.

Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, WikiProject Templates may be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.

Listing a template

[edit]
Shortcuts

To list a template for deletion or merging, follow this three-step process. The use of Twinkle (explained below) is strongly recommended, as it automates and simplifies these steps. Note that the "Template:" prefix should not be included anywhere when carrying out these steps (unless otherwise specified).

Step Instructions
I: Tag the template. Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:

Note:

  • If the template nominated is inline, do not add a newline between the TfD notice and the code of the template.
  • If the template to be nominated for deletion is protected, make a request for the TfD tag to be added, by posting on the template's talk page and using the {{editprotected}} template to catch the attention of administrators or Template editors.
  • For templates designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template.
  • Do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
    or
    Nominated for merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]].
  • Before saving your edit, preview your edit to ensure the Tfd message is displayed properly.

Multiple templates: If you are nominating multiple related templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with {{subst:Tfd|heading=discussion title}} or {{subst:Tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}} instead of the versions given above, replacing discussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing the PAGENAME code).

Related categories: If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, add {{Catfd|template name}} to the top of any categories that would be deleted as a result of the TfD, this time replacing template name with the name of the template being nominated. (If you instead chose a meaningful title for a multiple nomination, use {{Catfd|header=title of nomination}} instead.)

TemplateStyles pages: The above templates will not work on TemplateStyles pages. Instead, add a CSS comment to the top of the page:

/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024_October_9#Template:template_name.css */
II: List the template at TfD. Follow this link to edit today's TfD log.

Add this text to the top of the list:

  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add {{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without brackets|result of previous TfD}} directly after the |text= before the why (or alternatively, after the }} of the Tfd2/Catfd2).

Use an edit summary such as
Adding [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates: If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ). Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ), plus one more in |with=. |with= does not need to be used, but should be the template that you want the other templates to be merged into. Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

Related categories: If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code in the |text= field of the Tfd2 template but before the text of your rationale:

{{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
III: Notify users. Please notify the creator of the template nominated (as well as the creator of the target template, if proposing a merger). It is helpful to also notify the main contributors of the template that you are nominating. To find them, look in the page history or talk page of the template. Then, add one of the following:

to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of the other template for a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to make any interested WikiProjects aware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not use Article alerts. Deletion sorting lists are a possible way of doing that.

Multiple templates: There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination: please write a personal message in these cases.

Consider adding any templates you nominate for TfD to your watchlist. This will help ensure that the TfD tag is not removed.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors

[edit]

While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD (see above), nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give the criterion that it meets.

[edit]

WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{subst:Tfd notice}} for this.

Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's Article Alerts automatically, if they subscribe to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the template

[edit]

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the template and its talkpage that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the page history or talk page.

At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone else will either close the discussion or, where needed, "relist" it for another seven days of discussion. (That "someone" may not be you, the nominator.)

Once you have submitted a template here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is successful it will be added to the Holding Cell until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.

Also, consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

Twinkle

[edit]

Twinkle is a convenient tool that can perform many of the posting and notification functions automatically, with fewer errors and missed steps than manual editing. Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them have automatic alerts. It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.

Discussion

[edit]

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the deletion policy and explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommend subst or subst and delete and similar. This means the template text should be "merged" into the articles that use it. Depending on the content, the template page may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.

Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussion

[edit]

Administrators should read the closing instructions before closing a nomination. Note that WP:XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

[edit]

October 9

[edit]

Template:Kickers Offenbach squad

[edit]

WP:TFD#REASONS #2: redundant to template:Kickers Offenbach, which was created in 2016, a few weeks after this one was WP:XNRed to Kickers Offenbach. Paradoctor (talk) 16:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Redshirt

[edit]

This template is used less than 250 times in {{Infobox college football player}} and in-article tables, where it does not align with the bullet points at MOS:APPROPRIATEICONS. You can see an example of its typical use at Quinn Ewers. This usage could be easily replaced with the word "redshirt". Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good solution 136.58.84.30 (talk) 21:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leave the redshirt icon. Not sure about the reference to only being used 250 times. Perhaps I'm missing something. I see it all the time. 2601:5CF:4200:67A0:3725:A2C8:5E0C:E182 (talk) 00:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is used 236 times per [1]. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 02:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks fine. I think the redshirt icon should stay too. 66.215.49.212 (talk) 19:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the icon is a simple way to represent the concept and should stay as well.
Now that the 1-year transfer sit-out is over (and once the entire COVID class with extra eligibility leaves), it will be a helpful and straightforward designation. 2601:280:5D02:37B0:8D7F:AED0:5BD8:1C10 (talk) 05:41, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine. It is only used around 250 times because after graduating/going professional it’s no longer used on their page. I’d imagine it was used on 1000+ pages over last 5 years

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:14, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the icon looks good, and is a concise way to show a redshirt player. As someone else mentioned, the reason it’s only used 250 times because it doesn’t apply after they finish their college career, but hundreds of new redshirts happen every year.
Perhaps a solution would be to make the icon clickable, and direct visitors to a page explaining the redshirt process. 67.245.18.115 (talk) 13:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Clickable doesn't solve the accessibility problem, nor does it satisfy MOS:ICONS#Do not distort icons. Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:35, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He is actively starting this year and is no longer considered a red-shirt. This should be removed from his page. 2607:9B00:5612:2D00:2F9A:3193:9B87:CAF5 (talk) 01:17, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He absolutely still is a Redshirt Senior playing or not and Redshirt status is relevant for followers of college football. 107.220.89.156 (talk) 01:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whether or not the template remains in place, the information should be communicated using text for greater accessibility, both to those who browse without the benefit of images and those not familiar with the term in the context of U.S. college sports. (I know the image is linked to the appropriate page, but there's no visual indication of this, and it's not a typical use of links for images on English Wikipedia.) Using an icon could be an additional way to convey the info in the infobox. isaacl (talk) 16:05, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Its use is consistent and useful. --Bobak (talk) 15:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:23, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

No transclusions or incoming links. Created in 2023. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chapter disambiguation pages

[edit]

Since this navbox template is intended to link disambiguation pages and to be transcluded in the article namespace, there's an issue with this template because it will have to violate at least one of the following two guidelines at any given time: WP:BRINT and WP:INTDABLINK. At the present time, the template violates WP:BRINT since there are piped links to redirects instead of linking directly to some of the respective disambiguation pages in order to meet WP:INTDABLINK, but in the process violates WP:BRINT since direct links to pages should be used (so that the viewed page appears as unclickable bold in the navbox when currently viewing that page.) In order to fix this issue, the only resolution I see is to delete this template and replace their transclusions on each page with respective {{Intitle}}, {{Lookfrom}}, or similar templates. Steel1943 (talk) 20:12, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further review, the current setup of the template also violates WP:INTDABLINK since the links to the disambiguation page redirects are piped, but not in hatnotes; If the link is not in a hatnote, then the redirect is supposed to be linked to directly without link piping. Steel1943 (talk) 20:34, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a somewhat reductive reading. The template is a navigation template, it's not performing a disambiguation function itself. Therefore:
Keep. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
PS I fixed the BRINT issue. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:20, 28 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Okay, but your edit introduced additional/different WP:INTDABLINK issues since you directly linked to disambiguation page titles that do not include "(disambiguation)" in them, and since this navbox is transcluded on pages in the article namespace. Again, this proves that it is impossible for this navbox to not have any WP:BRINT or WP:INTDABLINK issues, and I would not be surprised if an editor who watches WP:DPL or WP:TDD reverts your edit. Steel1943 (talk) 22:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure enough, the edit was reverted by The Banner: [2]. Steel1943 (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If the issues are with WP:BRINT and WP:INTDABLINK then just fix it. The template is useful in offering navigation between related pages, which otherwise requires additional wasted editorial time. I see no real argument here other than WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Gonnym (talk) 09:45, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"If the issues are with WP:BRINT and WP:INTDABLINK then just fix it." My argument here is that they can't be fixed. Fixing one breaks the other. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing a navbox on a disambiguation page until I ran across this template, and this problem probably explains why. Steel1943 (talk) 14:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The template isn't what's broken, it's the bot that is malfunctioning. The bot should be fixed. Or, the links that work perfectly fine with "(disambiguation)" at the end, can continue doing so. I fail to see how that was an issue. Gonnym (talk) 19:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...Maybe WP:BRINT??? Steel1943 (talk) 19:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete What purpose does this template serve? I can see no meaningful use of this template. The Banner talk 18:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Navbox can help you see what purpose a navigation template serves. Gonnym (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know that. But this is a template to "navigate" among a certain type of disambiguation pages. Not based on content, but on the type of links. The Banner talk 19:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is a reasonable likelihood that someone wanting to look at one chapter disambiguation page might want to look at others. I'm not 100% convinced by navboxes, but given that we have them, this is not a bad use case. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]
It sounds like an otherstuff-argument, but the next step will be an navigation template for all surname-disambiguation pages? The Banner talk 11:54, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point right there: This navigation template should probably be replaced with a category. Steel1943 (talk) 13:13, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The template is clearly a useful navigation template, and none of the TFD reasons appear to apply. If there are problems with the content of the template, they should be fixed (the link to Chapter Eight stands out as different). If two guidelines are in conflict with each other, deleting this useful template will not fix that problem. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I really don't think we should be encouraging navboxes of disambiguation pages. You could sell me on succession boxes for this specific case, or the suggested intitle etc as in the OP. Izno (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There's some good discussion here, but at the moment there is not yet a consensus as to what to do.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Epic Rap Battles of History

[edit]

Now the cast have been purged (per WP:PERFNAV), there is not enough here to warrant a navbox. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 09:42, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IOS versions

[edit]

A regular table used only in one article. Should be subst there and the template deleted. Gonnym (talk) 09:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This template and the other two templates are too large to comfortably move to live within the article, plus this is a siilly reason to delete in my opinion. Templates can exist and only live on one article. Usually templates should only be deleted if they're completely unused, or violate a Wikipedia policy. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 11:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Templates that hold article content and are used in one article are a missue of template space, see the first bullet point at the guideline Wikipedia:Template namespace#Guidelines: Templates should not normally be used to store article text, as this makes it more difficult to edit the content. So this might be a silly reason to delete in your opinion, the community guideline says otherwise. Additionally, if we look at the page information for both pages. The template has Fewer than 30 watchers (which does not mean 29, and can also mean 0), while the page itself has 585, which makes these content pages more vulnerable to vandalism. Finally, too large to comfortably move to live within the article, it's not, it's fine. Gonnym (talk) 12:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The templates don't store article text though, they store information that can be moved to other articles when deemed necessary. That is why they were originally moved to template space in the first place. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 13:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and subsequent comments. Ed [talk] [OMT] 16:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but merge with Template:IPadOS versions and include this template on the iPadOS version history article in its place (then delete the iPadOS versions template, if the conclusion is to delete de iOS versions template, the iPadOS versions template should probably be deleted by the same reasoning). It's odd in the first place that an entire different template and table was created just for this one to say "go look at that template" instead of just including the 3 cells that are different. If there really was a need to hide extra rows on the iPad article, then that could have just been a parameter for the template, although I'd discourage that. YannickFran (talk) 21:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This does not address the fundamental issue this template has vs. Wikipedia:Template namespace#Guidelines. Ed [talk] [OMT] 21:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This template is arguably closer to a navigation then it is article text. The Wikipedia:Template namespace article itself uses a template for a similar purpose. Regardless, the comment was only meant to address the concern raised by Gonnym that the template is single purpose. YannickFran (talk) 22:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IPod Touch supported OS release

[edit]

A regular table used only in one article. Should be subst there and the template deleted. Gonnym (talk) 09:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IPhone models minimal

[edit]

A regular table used only in one article. Should be subst there and the template deleted. Gonnym (talk) 09:35, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but change. Arguably the table in this template should be replaced with the one over at List of iPhone models and then replace the use of that table with this template. A change in name is probably also appropriate at that point though, because this isn't "minimal". YannickFran (talk) 21:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Formula Kite World Championship medallists

[edit]

Unused as Formula Kite uses a different table. Gonnym (talk) 09:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox UK place/height

[edit]

Unused sub-template. Can't find it used also in an insource search. Gonnym (talk) 08:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Judo at the 2024 Summer Paralympics

[edit]

Unused sidebar as all links redirect to the same article. Gonnym (talk) 08:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cobaltore Onagawa squad

[edit]

Delete. This is a Japanese fifth tier team, where nearly all of the players will be, and currently are, non-notable. There is therefore no point in a navbox. Geschichte (talk) 07:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LDS Temple list/size-floor

[edit]

Unused probably since this edit. Gonnym (talk) 06:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 8

[edit]

Autumn Classic International templates

[edit]

Not a significant enough skating competition to warrant navigation boxes. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:40, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Acclaimed Music templates

[edit]

No transclusions. Created in 2017. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Manual edit requests

[edit]

No transclusions. This appears to be an abandoned experiment from 2021. It is also possible that this just needs {{subst only}} added to its documentation, if it is still used. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:21, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to deletion after the usual seven days. It was a neat idea, but the person who was pushing for it largely retired from Wikipedia before it could get deployed anywhere, so nothing happened. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rfd-NPF

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Rfd-NPF with Template:Redirect for discussion.
There has been an ongoing issue with Template:Rfd-NPF for almost a decade now. During the past decade, Template:Redirect for discussion and the way that it is structured has been integrated in various gadgets that are on Wikipedia. it has gotten to a point where gadgets, such as Wikipedia:XFDcloser, are reliant on the way Template:Redirect for discussion is structured. At the present time, Template:Rfd-NPF works in the way that Template:Redirect for discussion functioned prior to the template having most of its functionality moved over to a module.

In a nutshell, the structure of {{Rfd-NPF}} is outdated and needs to conform to what {{Redirect for discussion}} does in its entirety. In other words, though I am requesting this as a "merge", my actual vote is for Template:Rfd-NPF (and any related subpages) to be redirected to Template:Redirect for discussion (and/or related subpages) so that any call to {{Rfd-NPF}} actually calls and uses all paramters in {{Redirect for discussion}}. (Shortly after making this nomination, I will inform the talk page of the gadget that uses {{Rfd-NPF}} (Page curation) about this discussion.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, the target of redirect Wikipedia talk:Page Curation, has been informed of this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per what I said at WT:NPR, the seven day timeline for TfD is unrealistic to make this change. Please withdraw this TfD and create a phab ticket detailing the changes that need to be made. Once the extension has been updated you can proceed with the TfD. Sohom (talk) 01:44, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
..."Once the extension has been updated you can proceed with the TfD." ...No, this TFD is happening now. Per what I said at WT:NPR, a "seven day timeline" is not what happens at TFD and could take longer, which is why the "holding cell" subpage of TFD exists. TFD is for forming consensus, not to necessarily implement the consensus immediately after the discussion is closed. Steel1943 (talk) 15:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
mw:Extension:PageTriage, when tagging a redirect for RFD, currently writes {{subst:rfd-NPF|Reasoning goes here}}. What is it supposed to write under the new system? If it's just suppoed to write {{subst:Redirect for discussion|Reasoning goes here}}, you can just WP:BLAR it. Otherwise you'll need to file a Phab ticket and tag it PageTriage to change PageTriage's code. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:13, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Novem Linguae To my understanding, we need to do something like:
{{subst:RfD|content=
#REDIRECT [[Hello]]
}}
which imo might require more work due to fact that the deletion module treats tags as append or prepend-only. (AFAIK) Sohom (talk) 04:28, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Novem Linguae: That's essentially what I was getting to in my nomination statement: The resolution is not just a simple WP:BLAR; However, ultimately, the optimal solution after all the other tools and gadgets are resolved is to perform a WP:BLAR. Steel1943 (talk) 15:29, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What code do you want PageTriage to append prepend instead of {{subst:rfd-NPF|Reasoning goes here}}? –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Novem Linguae: I'm not sure what you mean here? I don't know the ins-and-out of modifying PageTriage to make this work. But, if I had to guess what you mean, the "prepend" would be:

{{subst:Redirect for discussion|content=

...and the "append" would be:

}}

...Basically, what Sohom Datta stated in their comment. The only main question I would have then which may help figure something out, given it truly seems that Sohom Datta sees what need to be done to the PageTriage code to make this work is: Does the "name=" parameter in {{Rfd-NPF/core}} need to exist? (From what I'm seeing, it seems that PageTriage users are somehow putting their rationale in that parameter rather than its intended purpose: See this revision's page syntax.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:00, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I got my head wrapped around this. Filed phab:T375440. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:31, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Novem Linguae: Just FYI, I just tested a substitution of {{Redirect for discussion}}, and the additional line breaks (\n) are not necessary at the beginning or the end. Steel1943 (talk) 21:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I updated the phab ticket. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:54, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Shindo

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links. Created in April 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Object as the creator. This is a template that largely exposes the Shindo module in a manner that can be used by casual users. We can use it as a placeholder to redirect users to more appropriate templates. Awesome Aasim 15:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's the purpose of this specific template? If it's only use is documentation, it does not belong there. Gonnym (talk) 18:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If a new scale is added to the module, but that scale's template cannot exist for some reason because the template already exists, then this can be used instead to invoke that seismic intensity scale. Awesome Aasim 19:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the templates like Template:JMA and Template:CWA I actually think those should be deleted. {{Shindo|JMA|1}} works and that is much better than needing to create a new template for each scale when there is no real reason for it. So I support the opposite, replace the various scales with this. Gonnym (talk) 20:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome Aasim, thank you for adding basic documentation and a category. This template appears to do most of what {{CSIS}} and similar templates do. Would you be open to a merge to single template? It looks like someone might have to add a few features/parameters to {{Shindo}} to make the merge easy to perform. If you think a merge is possible, I'll be happy to add relevant templates to this TFD. A complete list of those templates would be helpful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am terrible at documenting my code, sorry. I make the individual scales invocable for ease of template creation. I have no objections to a merge, but be aware that a lot of the work I did for the module was to ensure backwards compatibility with the previous template code.
I do think there are some useful areas like templatestyles and the like to make the coloring more uniform and dark mode compatible, which currently this module isn't. But that will require a bit of testing, and I do not want to break a thousand pages to attempt to make dark mode work. Awesome Aasim 22:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Odense Bulldogs roster

[edit]

Single-article roster template with no template parameters, documentation, or categories. Subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:55, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Keser

[edit]

Only two albums. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 14:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lochiel railway line

[edit]

Unused railway route template. Gonnym (talk) 06:45, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:10, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2025 World Athletics Championships

[edit]

Unused, all red links, created over a year in advance. Gonnym (talk) 09:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2025 Rugby Europe Championship pool tables

[edit]

Unused as 2025 Rugby Europe Championship uses different tables. Gonnym (talk) 09:13, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Undated

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. Withdrawn by nominator. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The rational for this template is no longer true - dating of comments is not required - the WP:REPLYTOOL breaks when a date is not used. We should not support systems that not only conflict with better systems but also break them completely. Gonnym (talk) 08:40, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Gonnym: dating of comments is not required isn't the rationale – it's a comment in the documentation (that can be removed) saying that this template was designed to be optional. The template is so that users can add the timestamp to comments that were added without dates. If the template doesn't currently work with WP:REPLYTOOL, then it might be best for the template to be fixed to be compatible with it, and a bot run through previous substs to make sure they're compatible too. There are still many many unsigned and undated comments on talk pages across the project; if an editor comes across one of these and wants to fix it, surely removing this template would prevent them from doing so (or lead them to use an unsuitable template, such as {{unsigned}}, instead) --YodinT 09:48, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are other templates that do that - {{Unsigned}} and {{Unsigned IP}}. This one specifically mentions to not use a date, while the other two do require a date. Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you might have misunderstood this template. The entire purpose of this template is to add a date to a comment that is signed but not dated – where does it mention not to use a date? {{Unsigned}} and {{Unsigned IP}} are for comments that haven't been signed at all – {{Undated}} is for comments that have been signed, but without a date, and it allows other editors to add the date to these comments after the fact. --YodinT 10:38, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying it. Not sure why I missed that. I've withdrawn and reverted the nomination. Gonnym (talk) 11:05, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


October 7

[edit]

Template:Diplomatic missions of Grenada

[edit]

Pointless to have a nav box with only 2 English entries. LibStar (talk) 22:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. We do not allow external links in navboxes, so links to non-English Wikipedia should not be present, if this leaves just two articles, then WP:NENAN applies. --woodensuperman 14:40, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Hazara

[edit]

Project was deleted. Gonnym (talk) 19:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AUTOPATRightPlace

[edit]

Unused banner-looking navbox. Gonnym (talk) 08:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: Wikipedia talk:Autopatrolled. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Taxonomy/Furia (animal)

[edit]

Nomen dubium of the most dubium kind - a hypothetical creature that Linnaeus considered responsible for a skin inflammation he experienced [3]. Might actually be worth an article, but no basis for placement in any taxonomic system, and certainly not in our taxonomic template system. Same applies to {{Taxonomy/Furia infernalis}}. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is that how we deal with those? Fair enough. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See here. YorkshireExpat (talk) 21:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is moving to draft space an option? That give the author time to write an article about the species. The Banner talk 01:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's beside the point, actually. We don't have taxonomic templates about hypothetical or non-existant animals in our system, which is why we can't have one about this taxon. For the same reason such an article could not have a taxobox (and thus no link to the template system anyway). --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 05:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stavesacre

[edit]

Other albums listed here were redirected years ago. This navbox no longer offers additional navigation that already doesn't exist in the articles that remain. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 02:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Useless for navigation. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 14:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 6

[edit]

Template:Grizzlys Wolfsburg roster

[edit]

Simple roster table that should be used directly at the team page. Subst there and delete template. Gonnym (talk) 19:27, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this template singled out for deletion while there are so many other ice hockey roster templates on Wikipedia? The Banner talk 14:01, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Grizzly Adams Wolfsburg roster

[edit]

Unused as Template:Grizzlys Wolfsburg roster is the template used. Gonnym (talk) 19:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2012 NCAA Division II independents football records

[edit]

Unused NCAA Division II independents football record templates. Gonnym (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kyivpastrans color

[edit]

Unused rail color template, usages have been migrated to Module:Adjacent stations/Ukrainian Railways. Taavi (talk!) 11:33, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it's been replaced with the module. Gonnym (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UZ style

[edit]

Unused rail color and lines templates, future uses should use Module:Adjacent stations/Ukrainian Railways instead. Taavi (talk!) 08:18, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it's been replaced with the module. Gonnym (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Light rail style

[edit]

Unused rail color and style template. Gonnym (talk) 08:07, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Taavi (talk!) 08:19, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Events at the 2023 Palarong Pambansa

[edit]

All links are redirects. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:56, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as there is nothing to navigate to. Gonnym (talk) 19:23, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:British legislation lists

[edit]

Propose merging Template:British legislation lists with Template:UK legislation.
Template:British legislation lists is a sidebar being used for the purposes of a navbox. There are certain things that it has that Template:UK legislation lacks, but that's why what I am suggesting is a merger. Pages that have the template such as

all have an extremely bulky page that actually makes navigation harder and makes the pages harder to edit. For these pages, the sidebar is actually distracting and reduces readability. For these purposes, a navbox would be perfect, because it would go at the bottom. Devolved legislation lists are not in Template:British legislation lists and are in Template:British legislation lists but that is why this is a merger. DotCoder (talk) 21:44, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 5

[edit]

Template:Manx Electric Railway style

[edit]

Now-unused succession box helper template. Was used with {{s-rail}}, uses have been migrated to {{adjacent stations}} which uses Module:Adjacent stations/Manx Electric Railway instead. Taavi (talk!) 12:00, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FootballDatabase.eu

[edit]

This website is considered non-reliable (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 423#Footballdatabase.eu and WP:WPFLINKSNO and therefore we should not have a template which makes using it easier. GiantSnowman 11:49, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Diplomatic missions of Chad

[edit]

Pointless to have a nav box with only 1 or 2 English entries. LibStar (talk) 03:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. We do not allow external links in navboxes, so links to non-English Wikipedia should not be present, if this leaves just two articles, then WP:NENAN applies. --woodensuperman 14:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 4

[edit]

Template:Has Fallen

[edit]

Provides no further navigation that Has Fallen does not already offer, failed WP:NENAN. -- Alex_21 TALK 22:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikitea2

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Wikitea2 with Template:Wikitea.
Forks are not needed to drink tea. Sdkb talk 06:42, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Munch plate

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Munch plate with Template:Munch.
The only meaningful difference between these two templates appears to be that one is for a single cookie, whereas the other is for a plate of cookies (plural). This difference could be handled by a parameter, but for this type of munching there is no need for a fork (pun intended). Sdkb talk 05:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:U.S. diplomatic terms

[edit]

Although the template is used on a large number of articles and has definitions that come in handy, a lot of what is included in the template should be indicated in the article lead. The way it is now, this template takes up excessive space and more attention than it should. For the articles where it is used (US ambassadors lists), I think the best approach would be to have a condensed description of the main roles/processes in the lead, with efn notes giving some of the additional detail if needed. Interested to hear other thoughts though! Dan the Animator 01:09, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 3

[edit]

Template:Cc-by-3.0-sg

[edit]

Orphaned licensing template. Singapore's freedom of panorama is more permissive than the US, so there will not be any derivative works which need this license that must be uploaded locally. Such files can and should be uploaded to Commons and tagged with c:Template:Cc-by-3.0-sg. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 20:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Template:R from alternative hatnote

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsensical purpose, seems to be created as an alternative to {{R from other disambiguation}} due to its previous usage at Grazing (behavior) and Paul Alexander (lawyer). ~ Eejit43 (talk) 15:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if it could be useful or not, but I suggest it be deleted. King I Likes Minecraft 1 (talk) 16:19, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:R from middle name

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. I see no possible uses cases that would be different from {{R from given name}}. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 15:42, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed King I Likes Minecraft 1 (talk) 16:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Lux Style Awards hosts

[edit]

Per Wikipedia:PERFNAV. Hosting an award show is not notable enough to be transcluded through navbox space. And not very defining for these people who have an article. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Road to episodes

[edit]

Duplication, already included in {{Family Guy}} --woodensuperman 11:09, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:English translations of the Bhagavad Gita

[edit]

This template page was made in error. It contravenes the basic premise that article content should not be stored in template space. I have restored the content to the one article that the content was taken from, Bhagavad Gita#English translations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand; maybe I'll just delete this laundry-list. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 04:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Texas counties

[edit]

This template cannot be seen in articles by over two-thirds of readers because this template (like all those using {{navbox}}) does not show up on the mobile version of the site. There are concerns that simply replacing it with a responsive design bloats page size for mobile devices. I therefore suggest deleting the template and replacing it with a link to List of counties in Texas. -- Beland (talk) 01:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep No violation of policy on templates/navboxes. So what if it can't be seen by mobile users? Most navboxes can't. And links articles on a subject where a navbox is benefited from having. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I would argue that pretty much all navboxes need to be replaced with something that works on both mobile and desktop. I'm just starting with this one and a few others where I can make a concrete proposal for how to do that.
    I don't think this navbox benefits desktop readers compared to the alternative. Because it's displayed by default as collapsed, it requires a click to active the list of counties. The link that would replace it requires the same number of clicks to see the list of counties. There's a page load instead of a JS activation, but instead of just an alphabetical list with no context, the curious reader gets a map and a table with interesting facts, which they can sort on characteristics of interest. That's much more likely to promote understanding and usefully assist readers who are looking for a specific county.
    If there's no policy that Wikipedia should be user-friendly for the supermajority of its readers who use the mobile site, maybe it's time to make one and catch up with the shifting demographic. -- Beland (talk) 02:28, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. TFD is not the place to start a grand crusade against navboxes. This template does not violate any template guidelines. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Are you in fact requesting that the mobile version needs to be fixed regarding templates? The Banner talk 00:41, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As a mobile-only editor I agree this is a broader issue, but it won't be solved by deleting one random template. AusLondonder (talk) 06:45, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, perfectly acceptable navbox, WP:POINTy nomination. --woodensuperman 13:59, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This one definitely needs some rejiggering per WP:CLN, contrary to Jonesey95. It is no more useful than a category of the same. I don't think there's a good way to make it usefuler, so I'm kinda in the delete group for it. Izno (talk) 17:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 2

[edit]
[edit]

No transclusions. The only discussion link I have found is this one, which happened shortly before this template's creation in January 2024. The template does not appear to have been adopted anywhere, so it may not be useful, or there may be a better way to generate these links. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:58, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PCL

[edit]

No transclusions of this licensing template. The discussion at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-PCL may explain why it is no longer used. It appears to have been replaced by more appropriate licensing templates on the pages that transcluded it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Books of the Bible

[edit]

(This is a nomination for merger into article space and replacement, not deletion per se, but that didn't fit into the form I'm filling out.)

I really like the links and groupings on this template. Unfortunately, over two-thirds of readers can't see it (or any template using {{navbox}}) on articles because they are using the mobile version of the site. If you go to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Books_of_the_Bible and make your browser window narrow like a phone screen, you can see the layout of this template would force horizontal scrolling if displayed on articles, which is a horrible user experience.

I would like to replace this template with a mobile-friendly way of presenting the same information. We could simply make a narrow-screen-friendly version with exactly the same content using responsive web design principles, and I'm happy to implement that if there's consensus to do so. Four things make me think that might not be the best solution. 1: It will result in a lot of vertical scrolling. (That might be OK at the end of the page if there are no other navigational elements after this one.) 2: It would be a lot more likely to be read out loud by screen readers, which is probably not a great experience. 3: This template is rendered collapsed by default on the desktop site, which is probably an indication that it's too long to expose to readers. 4: One of the rationales for not showing navboxes on mobile is that it extends page load time noticeably, for content most readers aren't going to use.

Since we already require at least one click for our desktop users to see this nav system, one way to keep one-click access to it for them and for the first time give mobile users one-click access to it is to merge the contents of the template to Outline of Bible-related topics#Books. Notionally what this does is move the long vertical list of links to a separate page load, to a page which already happens to exist and is accessible from other places. We could then put a "see also" link to that page at the bottom of articles on specific books of the Bible. I would also make sure the main articles Bible and Biblical canon are linked from per-book articles and have links (mostly in the article bodies) to all the appropriate targets listed here (which they already mostly do). All per-book articles also already have a forward/backward book-to-book nav mechanism at the bottom of the page. This does show up on mobile and would be a good alternative to a "See also" link.

If we want to try to "tempt" users to click through to other articles more strongly than a single link would probably do, we could also take the items in the left column (OT, deuterocanon, apocrypha, NT, subdivisions, development, manuscripts, related) and make them into a much shorter list of standard links. That would be fairly easy to scroll through, would impact page load time a lot less, and wouldn't have to be rendered as collapsed by default. This could be a standard part of the "See also" section of per-book articles, or we could make a mobile-friendly nav template. -- Beland (talk) 18:50, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I tend to disagree. The current article has plenty of links to the related and main articles: that mobile phone users cannot see Books of the Bible does not look like a major pain point for them. Would putting the information from the Navbox into the article just be a repetition? I tend to think that no changes should be made, and that the Navbox should stay, unless a better case can be made. Also, I expect we don't want the article to have off-topic material on the non-detero-canonicals (e.g. the protocanonicals) Rick Jelliffe (talk) 03:09, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Are you in fact requesting that the mobile version needs to be fixed regarding templates? The Banner talk 00:42, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Perfectly acceptable navbox, WP:POINTy nomination. --woodensuperman 14:01, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have seen the commentary on the relevant Phabricator task. I haven't said it there, but since you've now nominated a template: You will need more consensus than TFD can provide to go on the mission to neuter navboxes to only a dozen links each. (I am not necessarily a person who [dis]agrees with the venture.) I doubt you can get it. I'm happy to discuss other ideas onwiki or off after the close of this TFD.
    As regards the issue about responsiveness, I have been working on Template:Navbox/div every now and then the past few years, with a recent flurry due to some ill-considered sweeping by an external user. It still needs some work but I'd be happy to work with someone on it (integration with the relevant module or a sandbox version of the same, checking against every one of the pathological test cases, and so on). Izno (talk) 17:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Automatic archive navigator editsection

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 17:17, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Used by a single user and duplicates Template:Archive. Replace with template (as its actually used only once and transcluded the other times) and delete template. Gonnym (talk) 14:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does not "duplicate" Template:Archive -- it does something that's impossible to do using that template.
From the first sentence of the documentation page (?):
Template:Automatic archive navigator editsection is the exact same thing as Template:Automatic archive navigator but without emitting __NONEWSECTIONLINK__ and __NOEDITSECTION__ into the wikitext, so you can still edit sections.
From the name of the template itself, where it seems pretty difficult to miss (??):
Automatic archive navigator editsection
I cannot tell from the nomination whether you're proposing to edit my talk page archives to break them by replacing this with a different template, or whether you're proposing to delete the template and then forcing me to manually copy all of the code to implement an archive navigator template between all of my talk archives. I would prefer if neither of these are done.
I do not personally care whether this is in the template namespace or in my userspace; I made it a template so that other people could benefit from my having written it. If this bothers you, please feel free to move it to my userspace (so long as you are willing to fix the talk page archives so they transclude it from the new title), but please do not break all of my talk page archives. jp×g🗯️ 14:41, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe we need endless templates that do the same or quite similar things. It seems the community also does not believe in that as the various archive templates are being merged and deleted. I also don't believe there is anything special about your talk pages that is unique to them. However, if you feel the need to use special code, then this should be in your user space. If it's in the template space then expect community consensus to say how your userspace looks like. Gonnym (talk) 01:19, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not personally care whether this is in the template namespace or in my userspace; I made it a template so that other people could benefit from my having written it. If this bothers you, please feel free to move it to my userspace (so long as you are willing to fix the talk page archives so they transclude it from the new title). jp×g🗯️ 15:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:EUCommissionercountEuropeanParty

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and deprecated template. Gonnym (talk) 13:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:French Syndicate of Cinema Critics Awards

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and mostly blanked template. Gonnym (talk) 13:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Attached KML/U.S. Route 70 Bypass (Goldsboro, North Carolina)

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused as U.S. Route 70 Bypass (Goldsboro, North Carolina) was merged into Interstate 42. Gonnym (talk) 13:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Latest preview software release/JuK

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 12:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused software release version templates. Gonnym (talk) 11:13, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Weather box 2

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 12:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused duplicate of Template:Weather box Gonnym (talk) 10:33, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Blas de Lezo class cruisers

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 12:37, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation template without articles to navigate to. Gonnym (talk) 08:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Tlitn

[edit]

Unused but also something that probably should not exist. The language templates produce proper italics. If a specific template isn't producing the correct style, it should be fixed at the source. Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies all for not using this upon creation: luckily, I've just gotten around to it. Just like {{langr}}, there are myriad situations where one should set |italics=unset on this template—many proper names that are functionally non-English are an easy class of examples: e.g. {{tlitn|zh|Gwoyeu Romatzyh}}, so a shortcut is well-justified in my view. Sorry again for getting around to it so late. Remsense ‥ 论 16:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is that style of not using italics for names supported by the MoS? If so, can you point to it? Gonnym (talk) 09:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, see the bit near the bottom of Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Spelling and romanization. Remsense ‥ 论 08:17, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. Regarding the actual code, why does this template not follow the documentation and use {{Transliteration}} with |italic=unset? Gonnym (talk) 08:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, good question. I think it's because I quickly bodged it by copying from {{langn}}, where it makes sense to specifically cancel out the bolding or italicization that might be present in certain display situations like infobox headings and the like. I'll fix it to save a template call. Remsense ‥ 论 08:57, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, withdraw nomination. Seems the MoS supports this settings. Gonnym (talk) 09:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for taking so long in getting back to you—wasn't getting the notifications. Remsense ‥ 论 09:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 07:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old discussions

[edit]

Completed discussions

[edit]

A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at the "Holding Cell".

For an index of all old and archived discussions, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion&oldid=1240534959"