Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 February 19

< February 18	February 20 >

February 19

Template:NFL Alumni Order of the Leather Helmet

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was Delete. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:41, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NFL Alumni Order of the Leather Helmet (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox cruft; insignificant award that is mentioned in almost none of the articles the template is linked to. Lizard (talk) 23:52, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.--Yankees10 01:12, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Parkways on Long Island

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. Primefac (talk) 17:34, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Parkways on Long Island (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Better suited by a category. Also see past Valdosta precedent, since confirmed here, here, here, and here, here, and here, and here, and here. Rs chen 7754 21:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per past precedent. Dough4872 12:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—per precedent. Imzadi 1979 → 12:43, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete per precedent. Frietjes (talk) 16:15, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I don't see categories sorting between east-west parkways, north-south parkways or proposed parkways. This is a disturbingly ugly trend. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 03:05, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- I know it's hard to believe, but people can actually read the article. navboxes aren't visible in mobile view. Frietjes (talk) 16:41, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per prior precedent....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:34, 26 February 2017 (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).

User:Stemoc/Infobox rugby

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was keep. Primefac (talk) 17:37, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{User:Stemoc/Infobox rugby}}
Template:Infobox rugby biography (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Infobox rugby union biography (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Fork of {{infobox rugby biography}} / {{Infobox rugby union biography}} with article space uses. 98.230.196.215 (talk) 18:00, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ughhh, what a mess. I suppose this should be listed at MFD? Frietjes (talk) 16:15, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep my personal userspace and its not a fork, its quite different, @Frietjes: broke it without finding out the difference and then refuse to respond to my query and now i have to get the original back and then forced to create more templates because I can no longer use the original ones. Rugby League and Rugby UNION are quite different sport when it comes to scoring points and thus would have a different scoring system, you should have gone through the template before destroying it and if you do not understand the difference, leave it alone. The IP who reported it has a habit of trying to use a "soccer" template on rugby related articles and reported my templates out of sheer trolling. I created a working fork (which is now broken thanks to Frietjes silliness) and then neither BOTHERED to tell me that they have nominated my templates for MfD, I just saw it by chance, how pathetic. I'm trying to fix it now using previous variables because there was nothing really wrong with it. I use the template on articles I create and those that need it the most. Frietjes change has actually done more damage to the original. The rugby union section of these {{Infobox rugby union biography}} is completely wrong, you botched it up, please next time ask before making changes.--Ste moc 20:48, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- User:Stemoc, so, you are using a user-space template in article-space and expect editors to maintain it? I haven't made any substantial edits to {{Infobox rugby union biography}} since 2015, so you will have to be more specific. Frietjes (talk) 20:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - User:Frietjes maintain what?, it was never broken. Apart from one minor issue, the template is perfect. The scoring system for Rugby league is different from Rugby union. see the "club" section for my template, as you can see, its options are different from what rugby league templates have. I created an actual "Rugby Union" template. League only has Caps, tries, field goals, and conversions as options whereas rugby union has caps, tries, penalties, drop goals and conversions (5 options instead of 4) and thus i created one that was prefect for just that, again, its not a fork, its an UPDATE which i intend to prefect and then try to move to the main space so that it can be used on all 90k rugby union related articles...--Ste moc 20:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Editors can keep what they like in their sandbox however userspace templates should never be used in articles so I've commented it out, Stemoc you can always create a new official template but at present you obviously can't use userspace templates, –Davey2010^Talk 21:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- The issue with creating an official template is that its usually linked with other templates which are protected and thus it may take a long time to get something added/updated...but with personal userpace ones, you can fix, update and make random changes and others can fix issues they find with it as well, it works a a project. I created the template cause i was tired of seeing a "soccer" template being "forked" and used as a rugby template and anyone who knows the difference between both the sport will know how pathetic and silly it is..Infact, i used my "updated" infobox on articles I CREATED only but if this means that we are forced to use the 'soccer' infobox ONLY, I will now refuse to create anymore rugby union player related articles --Ste moc 22:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - I agree it is a pain in the ass but it's the way it is - You could always become a WP:Template editor which would mean you wouldn't have to wait, No one is forcing you to use the soccer one, You can easily create the other one as an actual template (despite the waiting etc), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 08:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
keep, per Davey2010 and it really should have been MFD'ed. But agree while in userspace it should not be used or linked from any article. To be used it should be in the Template: namespace.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 22:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Mobile phone companies in Ukraine

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2017 March 5 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:41, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mobile phone companies in Ukraine (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Ukraine mobile phone companies (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Comital House of Cseszneky

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. Primefac (talk) 17:30, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Comital House of Cseszneky (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single-use navbox with only two links, one of which is a redirect. DrKay (talk) 16:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Borsoka (talk) 16:39, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Noble Family of Szilágyi-Oaș

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. Primefac (talk) 17:30, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Noble Family of Szilágyi-Oaș (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused; one link navbox. DrKay (talk) 16:23, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Borsoka (talk) 16:39, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Walter Camp Distinguished American Award

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was Delete. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Walter Camp Distinguished American Award (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template cruft; minor award which is hardly (if ever) mentioned on any of the awardees' articles. Certainly not career-defining. Lizard (talk) 07:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Cbl62 (talk) 10:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Kind of undecided on this, but if it is deleted what about Template:Walter Camp Alumni of the Year or Template:Walter Camp Man of the Year? They probably aren't any more notable than this one.--Yankees10 01:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:FlowMention

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. Primefac (talk) 17:29, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FlowMention (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Ping}}. Ppp ery 01:53, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom - Flow's a thing of the past (thank the lord!) so no need for this - I would suggest tho that if this gets deleted that someone goes through Whatlinkshere changes all of the "flowmention"s to "U" or "ping" so we don't break links, . –Davey2010^Talk 03:32, 19 February 2017 (UTC)d[reply]
Delete Cleanup Done. I replaced uses of this template with ping. This template is redundant and Flow has been uninstalled. Alsee (talk) 01:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Alsee, Much appreciated :) –Davey2010^Talk 03:53, 20 February 2017 (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).

Flow templates

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. Primefac (talk) 17:28, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LQT Moved thread stub converted to Flow (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:LQT page converted to Flow (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Archive for converted LQT page (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:LQT post imported with supressed user (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:LQT post imported with different signature user (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Wikitext talk page converted to Flow (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused templates that will not be used since Flow has been uninstalled from the English Wikipedia. Ppp ery 01:45, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom - Useless templates now that Flow is no longer "flowing". . –Davey2010^Talk 03:37, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete per nom. If Flow ever returns we might have need for templates like them, but they can then be (re-)created based on whatever guidelines and practices are then.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 11:10, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Flow templates, including any that were overlooked in this list. Obsolete. Flow has been uninstalled. Alsee (talk) 02:56, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Roads in Tennessee

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. Primefac (talk) 17:27, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Roads in Tennessee (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Every useful link in this box is already present in the infobox of each article where it appears, removing the need for this navbox. Such boxes have also been deleted several times in the past, such as with Virginia in September 2005, New York in November 2005, Florida in November 2005, Oregon in February 2006, etc. Imzadi 1979 → 00:09, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete redundant to infobox. --Rs chen 7754 03:54, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete, redundant navigation. Frietjes (talk) 16:16, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Links already in infobox. Dough4872 21:58, 20 February 2017 (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).