Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 April 18

< April 17	April 19 >

April 18

Template:RS500Albums

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) 03:06, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RS500Albums 301–400 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:RS500Albums 401–500 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Consensus has dictated that the entire list of 500 albums may be a copyright violation so the attempt to do the same via a template seems to be an attempt to circumvent that. I still wouldn't be sure a NavBox is the best way to do this when, if it was allowed, a list article would be better than placing this in the articles for each album so one could navigate from #405 on the list to #498. I also noticed that many of the articles reference a different position than what the position in the navbox, so which list is being used? Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:45, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. Whether or not this is a copyvio, we don't need a navbox for this. --wooden superman 13:34, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I was looking at the RS500 page and noticed the RS500 401-500 template was unfinished and had a red link to RS500 301-400, so I looked in the talk page and elsewhere to see if there was a reason for this; I couldn't find one so I thought I was being helpful by finishing 401-500 and making 301-400. Clearly this was not the case, these templates seem pretty redundant anyway as the list can be found on the Rolling Stone website anyway which is linked on the page. In answer to which list was being used, it was whichever is on the Rolling Stone website, linked on the page (500 this one) for at least 301-420 (the bit I contributed). GeorgmentO (talk) 09:13, 21 April 2018 (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:Footer Olympic Champions Allround Speed Skating Men

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 2018 April 28. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Footer_Olympic_Champions_Allround_Speed_Skating_Men (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).

Fb team templates National teams

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) 02:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fb team Israel U-19 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Fb team Japan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Fb team Kosovo (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Fb team Qatar under-23 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Fb team Vietnam (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Old style, no need, should be subst or replaced by other template or style, such as using direct interlinks, Template:Fb, Module:Sports results and Module:Sports table. Previous discussions please see WT:FOOTY. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 10:23, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 15:39, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - long-standing consensus that these kind of templates are not needed. Giant Snowman 17:24, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all after replacing per nom and prior consensus, templates are unnecessary for simple wikilinks. S.A. Julio (talk) 16:04, 19 April 2018 (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:United States Department of Homeland Security Leadership

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) 03:07, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:United States Department of Homeland Security Leadership (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not used in any articles; not a standard for US government agencies, category will do the trick. Corky 02:56, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

delete, the structure section does a much better job showing the leadership. Frietjes (talk) 22:20, 25 April 2018 (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:Noleak

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 2018 April 28. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Noleak (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:No political diagram

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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:07, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:No political diagram (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Too specific. Lojbanist ^{remove cattle from stage} 02:21, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Great to point editors to useful tool, and some articles can be reasonably considered incomplete without a political diagram. Daask (talk) 21:18, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:38, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

keep, useful, and not too specific. Frietjes (talk) 16:42, 18 April 2018 (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:Improve Olympic Sailing Article

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 no consensus. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:07, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Improve Olympic Sailing Article (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Overspecific template. Lojbanist ^{remove cattle from stage} 02:16, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:34, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

keep until a replacement is identified. Frietjes (talk) 22:18, 25 April 2018 (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:Format

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 2018 April 28. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Format (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:Chart dates

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) 19:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chart dates (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Overly-specific cleanup template. Lojbanist ^{remove cattle from stage} 02:09, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Being specific about feedback is a virtue. --Doncram (talk) 02:49, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unused, and agree that this is overly-specific. --Izno (talk) 17:39, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Daask (talk) 21:26, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is it being used? Clearly I saw a need for it 4 years ago, but if it hasn't been taken up or if the pages have all been sorted out, then it's had enough of a chance. Btljs (talk) 14:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:27, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

delete, probably useful back in 2014, but it looks like it hasn't been used since. Frietjes (talk) 22:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Izno Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:58, 28 April 2018 (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).