- 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) 22:24, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused template.
Gonnym (
talk) 23:52, 13 January 2022 (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.
Izno (
talk) 18:35, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions. Superseded by {{
Afroasiatic languages}}, which contains all of these navboxes and a few more. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 16:09, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete as a pointless wrapper. If the intention is to only have those 4 navboxes on
Chadic languages, then use those 4 templates. We don't need a template that holds those templates for that.
Gonnym (
talk) 23:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per Gonnym. In fact a wrapper for navboxes is nearly always counterproductive. Having to open a wrapper before opening a second template is all going to discourage users from using these for their actual purpose, navigation.
Nigej (
talk) 06:36, 14 January 2022 (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) 22:22, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions, no incoming links. If we ever tagged WikiProject pages in this non-obvious way, we no longer do so; categories work just fine. See
previous TFD (December 2020) about a similar template. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:51, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Comment: Also note that there are at least
a dozen or so similar templates that have a few transclusions but that are probably similarly inappropriate. Since they are transcluded, they should not be added to this nomination, but a separate nomination would be fine. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- I've never noticed these but these are really bad.
Template:PartofWPLDS for example is used directly on articles.
Gonnym (
talk) 22:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Comment The solution obtained from the TfD for "PartofWPPUNJAB" was to move it into projectspace as a subpage. This could be carried out for all of these that were discovered.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Punjab/PartofWPPUNJAB (
2017 TfD) --
65.92.246.142 (
talk) 03:19, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Comment These are all formatted the same way. A MetaTemplate should be built, instead of each of these coding their own divs. That would standardize the look and the templates could all then be traced back to the metatemplate. These all look akin to {{
topicon}} ; perhaps that could be used as a solution to standardizing these. --
65.92.246.142 (
talk) 03:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. We have WikiProject banners that go on talk pages. There is no reason for another tag on the non-talk page.
Gonnym (
talk) 22:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Comment looks like {{
PartofWPIran}} was replaced by {{
PartofWPIran2}} -- therefore REDIRECT {{
PartofWPIran}} to {{
PartofWPIran2}} --
65.92.246.142 (
talk) 03:24, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete All completely unnecessary. eg
Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran/Open Tasks (tagged with {{
PartofWPIran2}}) doesn't need to be so tagged, its clearly part of the project from its name and the banner on the talk page. So the template simply provides a clickable flag which takes you to the project page. If the article is in the right place (as here) it's very easy to get there anyway and if it's not, it needs moving. Worse, some of these "PartofWP..." templates are now in user talk pages.
Nigej (
talk) 08:47, 14 January 2022 (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) 22:22, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions, incoming links, documentation, or categories. The only substantive edits were creation in 2005. This may have been used at one time, but its utility appears to have diminished to zero. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:50, 13 January 2022 (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; deleted as
G7 by
Primefac (
talk ·
contribs ·
blocks ·
protections ·
deletions ·
page moves ·
rights ·
RfA)
AnomieBOT
⚡ 10:10, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions. Empty template created by
Primefac, who knows which way is up but who appears to have abandoned this idea after creating this placeholder. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:45, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions except on one user page. These are all except one of the templates in
Category:Outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org course templates; they appear to be an abandoned experiment. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:38, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:18, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions. Sidebar with no main article and only four linked articles.
Category:Parks and commons in the Metropolitan Borough of Bury is probably sufficient to link these articles together. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Used to be a few articles (4, I suspect) after creation in 2008 but has since been removed from them all. Fails much of what makes a good sidebar, in particular, there's no parent article.
Nigej (
talk) 22:02, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:18, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links. Only substantive edits were creation in 2007. Template:Parameter footer:
searching for the name of this template in template space turns up nothing, so it does not appear to be called by any other templates. The same is true of
Template:parameter header –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:27, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete both per nom.
* Pppery *
it has begun... 23:23, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Comment a rough doc added --
65.92.246.142 (
talk) 03:57, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Comment it looks like it was supposed to be used as template documentation to standardized soccer template parameter tables --
65.92.246.142 (
talk) 03:56, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Perhaps some plan to standardise documentation of the fb templates, but seemingly never used.
Nigej (
talk) 08:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.
Giant
Snowman 11:47, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete - not needed.
Giant
Snowman 11:48, 14 January 2022 (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 23:49, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
This is banner cruft from 15 years ago. Recommend total deletion.
Izno (
talk) 21:27, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Never caught on. Would favor removal of the table elements and subsequent subst/deletion.
Izno (
talk) 21:26, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions or incoming links.
Nuclear power in Pakistan uses a straightforward location map, so a single-use template page is probably not needed. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:22, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Notification template from 14 years ago that would normally be in plain text these days.
Izno (
talk) 21:22, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. Highly specific template created 14 years ago and left unused waiting to be deleted.
Nigej (
talk) 21:28, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Subst and delete. No longer useful. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:31, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:08, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Basically unused after 15 years.
Izno (
talk) 21:16, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete A template to notify readers of an article that another language Wikipedia is considering deleting its version of the article. Looks like it was used once, in 2007.
Nigej (
talk) 21:24, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Comment if kept, it should be converted to a notice boilerplate text subst-only template, like other deletion notification templates (ie. {{
TFDnote}} ) --
65.92.246.142 (
talk) 04:13, 14 January 2022 (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) 22:07, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Used on two articles (one after I remove it in a moment), with a half-dozen links to the main page and little else. Basically, there isn't enough here to merit a sidebar.
Primefac (
talk) 19:57, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:06, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused but also it's more simple to just use a pipe and a label. The 3rd example is just a complete
MOS:EGG.
Gonnym (
talk) 19:39, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Used on the wrong pages and this is not a country but an international political organization. Has no real chance of usage. The user who created this has been doing disruptive editing and two of his alt accounts have been blocked permanently. --
WikiCleanerMan (
talk) 19:20, 13 January 2022 (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.
Izno (
talk) 18:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Listed as under construction since it was restored in 2018. After
asking at WikiProject Portals, it seems this was never used.
Gonnym (
talk) 18:15, 13 January 2022 (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.
Izno (
talk) 17:36, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Used in one portal but does the same exact thing as
Template:Purge link portals just resizing it a little. I don't think that the resize is helpful, but even if it were, a resize parameter could have been added. No need for another template. To be clear though, I propose a replacement and deletion, not a merge, as 489 portals work fine with the standard size compared to this one usage.
Gonnym (
talk) 17:05, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Replace/delete per nom. Surely we want a common style. I'd be against a resize parameter.
Nigej (
talk) 18:44, 13 January 2022 (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) 22:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused in actual portals and only used in two archived talk pages. Should be subst there and deleted.
Gonnym (
talk) 17:01, 13 January 2022 (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.
Izno (
talk) 17:33, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Now unused after I replaced the single use at
Template:User Republic of Ireland/cat with {{
Pbox|Republic of Ireland}}
.
Gonnym (
talk) 16:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. Just provided a different flag in a link to a portal.
Nigej (
talk) 18:13, 13 January 2022 (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.
Izno (
talk) 17:33, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused portal templates.
Gonnym (
talk) 16:39, 13 January 2022 (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.
Izno (
talk) 17:30, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions. None of these teams are independent today, so there is no possible use for this navbox at this time. Most have joined the
ASUN Conference. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 14:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. Ceased to have a useful purpose. Clearly intended to be a current list.
Nigej (
talk) 15:26, 13 January 2022 (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.
Izno (
talk) 17:37, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions. Replaced by {{EstcatCountryDecade|Myanmar}}
in
Category:1980s establishments in Myanmar. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 14:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. Superseded by the generic template noted.
Nigej (
talk) 15:27, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- The above claims are inaccurate. This template was never used on the 1980s decade category, but on year categories within that range, namely
Category:1980 establishments in Burma to 1988. It has not been superseded by a generic template. Rather, as part of the roll-out of {{
navseasoncats}} two years ago,
user:BrownHairedGirl replaced it with nine lines of tailored code. I suggest that it would be better to insert more instances of {{
resolve category redirect}} within {{
EstcatCountry}}, for the parent categories that are generated by that template, and then replace the nine lines of code with that. Once that has been done, a few more category redirects between old and new country names in anachronistic years & decades will make EstcatCountry suitable to replace the nominated template's siblings: {{
Namibia 1910s estab by year}}, {{
Thailand 1930s estab by year}}, and perhaps {{
Russia 1910s estab by year}} – which is a little different as it has separate lines for Russian Empire and Russia. –
Fayenatic
London 20:01, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Thanks for the clarification. However eg
Category:1982 establishments in Burma seems to work ok without it. We don't have a {{
Myanmar 1970s estab by year}} but
Category:1972 establishments in Burma also seems to work well, so I still don't see the point of retaining the highly specific template we're discussing.
Nigej (
talk) 20:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
-
Fayenatic london, thanks for that explanation. Is this template still useful in some way? It sounds like it has been superseded by
BrownHairedGirl's useful code updates. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 21:41, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- No, this can go. Its purpose was to bridge the change of name in categories from Burma to Myanmar in 1989 – that's why there was no need for e.g. a 1970s template. It is now no longer needed since
Tom.Reding put the "resolve category redirect" functionality into Navseasoncats. As for sibling templates, there are also {{
Russia 1720s estab by year}}, {{
Russia 1720s disestab by year}} and {{
Russia 1910s disestab by year}}. –
Fayenatic
London 08:11, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Fix {{
EstcatCountry}} and use it per Fayenatic. Fix EstcatCountry either by using {{
Resolve category redirect}} or by placing a specific Burma check for years 1980-1988. In categories it is better to use one of the category templates than use manual categories as changes to the template will be missed by those not using it.
Gonnym (
talk) 21:47, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete as unused. The rest of this discussion belongs elsewhere since nobody is arguing for returning this template to use.
* Pppery *
it has begun... 23:23, 13 January 2022 (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 14:37, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions. Was
once used at
Wikipedia:Multiple-place names, which is now an empty historical page. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 14:30, 13 January 2022 (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 14:36, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links. May have been used at one point, but no longer appears to be useful. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 14:19, 13 January 2022 (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 14:34, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Anjou (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Lachine (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/LaSalle (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Le Plateau-Mont-Royal (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Montréal-Nord (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Outremont (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Rivière-des-Prairies–Pointe-aux-Trembles (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Rosemont–La Petite-Patrie (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Saint-Laurent (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Saint-Léonard (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Verdun (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Ville-Marie (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
-
Template:Montreal municipal election, 2021/Borough results/Villeray–Saint-Michel–Parc-Extension (
talk ·
history ·
transclusions ·
logs ·
subpages)
No transclusions. Empty data cells. These templates appear to have been designed for single-article use at
2021 Montreal municipal election, but there are already tables in that article. Delete, or userfy if the creator would like to keep the image cells and add them to the article. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 14:14, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. And as they said, even if it were used, it would still be single used template which would be much better in the article itself.
Gonnym (
talk) 16:24, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. and personally I prefer the style that is currently used.
Nigej (
talk) 17:43, 13 January 2022 (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 12:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Created in 2015 and unused other than in the creator's sandbox. Subst there and delete.
Gonnym (
talk) 11:00, 13 January 2022 (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 12:48, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused other than in a user's page which hasn't been edited since 2012. Subst there and delete.
Gonnym (
talk) 10:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete as unused. We've drifted away from this style of timeline. Just looks a mess. Can't see us going back to them.
Nigej (
talk) 12:01, 13 January 2022 (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 12:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused in mainspace and only used in two archived talk pages. Subst there and deleted.
Gonnym (
talk) 10:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- I was proud of this at the time, but it seems nobody updated it and
it was removed in 2014 by
Johnfos. As you say,
it should be preserved in discussion of its removal started by
J. D. Redding, and the
reference debate on modifying it (otherwise the discussion is rootless - notwithstanding it seems to have been started by a sockpuppeter...), but if not actively used there is no need to keep it as a template.
GreenReaper (
talk) 12:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Subst/Delete per nom. Can't see a need for it, even if it was updated.
Nigej (
talk) 12:55, 13 January 2022 (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 12:53, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused other than in a talk page. Subst there and delete.
Gonnym (
talk) 10:53, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete As with so many of these timelines, they date back to the early days when such things were quite common. Won't get used again IMO.
Nigej (
talk) 12:05, 13 January 2022 (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 12:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused other than in an abandoned user's page which hasn't been edited by them since 2009. Subst there and delete.
Gonnym (
talk) 10:53, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Subst/Delete per nom. Seems to be a one-off, no other years.
Nigej (
talk) 12:58, 13 January 2022 (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 13:01, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
The above are all unused Bose related timeline templates that were created over 11 years ago. The pages that I found that could theoretically host these are
Bose headphones,
Bose shelf stereos, and
List of Bose home audio products, however if after 11 years these aren't used then these are probably not wanted and I won't be adding them.
Gonnym (
talk) 10:45, 13 January 2022 (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 13:02, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Template:Geological category see also was converted to Lua making these sub templates obsolete.
Gonnym (
talk) 10:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. No longer needed. —
hike395 (
talk) 12:48, 13 January 2022 (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 13:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused geological period template.
Gonnym (
talk) 10:36, 13 January 2022 (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 merge to
Template:Culture of Wales.
✗
plicit 13:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions, no incoming links. Recommend merging the most relevant links into {{
Culture of Wales}}, which has a "Religion" subhead but no section to expand under the subhead. If this closes as "merge", and someone pings me, I'll be happy to perform a selective merge. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 04:24, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Merge Seems a very sensible way forward.
Nigej (
talk) 07:55, 13 January 2022 (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 05:07, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
No transclusions. These sidebars appear to have been abandoned in favor of their parent template, {{
History of Australia}}. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 04:09, 13 January 2022 (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 13:06, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
I am new to TfD so this might not be the best phrased argument, but this seems like a version of
CROSSCAT for templates. I do understand all of these counties are Majority-minority counties, but that seems like not enough of a notable piece of information about these counties to group them together in a template. Maybe this might work a bit better as a category?
Tartar
Torte 01:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Let me ping
WikiCleanerMan to see if they're on board with adding that as well as they already !voted, but I agree those templates should also be listed and if WCM is ok with that I'll list those as well.
Tartar
Torte 15:53, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- I support deleting those as well. The same issues are with those as with the template nominated. --
WikiCleanerMan (
talk) 16:13, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Sweet, adding them in.
Tartar
Torte 16:44, 13 January 2022 (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.
Izno (
talk) 17:29, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
Unused geological eon template.
Gonnym (
talk) 00:49, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Unused. --
WikiCleanerMan (
talk) 01:50, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Comment this also has a subtemplate, {{
Proterozoic 220px}} that is unused except in this template. It should probably be bundled here --
65.92.246.142 (
talk) 03:46, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Added here. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 04:11, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Added another sub template of these. --
Gonnym (
talk) 10:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Comment (as creator): I created this template thinking it may be useful for Proterozoic lifeform pages like
Dickinsonia, where the traditional {{
Geological range}} template bar may not contain the time period it lived in and where the span of time being talked about is too short to make using {{
Long fossil range}} justified. I haven't gotten around to requesting to add it to {{
Taxobox}} or any other templates, though.
Benniboi01 (
talk) 17:10, 13 January 2022 (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 except IC50.
✗
plicit 05:02, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
The above are all unused chemical related templates.
Gonnym (
talk) 00:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom.
User:GKFX
talk 19:26, 13 January 2022 (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).