Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 March 20

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Crss templates

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 16:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates, and not needed. Their purpose seems to be to add those flag colours to articles, but we don't add random team colours to scorecards on the cricket WikiProject. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:05, 20 March 2021 (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) 16:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template and not needed. I have literally no idea why it's using CCEW and not CCC, but it doesn't save much effort to use this template anyway Joseph2302 (talk) 18:00, 20 March 2021 (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) 16:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only used twice, and not needed, as we have links to previous/next series in the infobox anyway, as well as Template:Ashes Test series which includes all series and is transcluded on most Ashes series pages Joseph2302 (talk) 17:58, 20 March 2021 (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) 16:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Ethnic issues" (the wording is so vague its even a redlink) is weasle wording for racism. Every single "Ethnic issues in foo" page is either redirected to a "Racism in foo" article or in the process of being moved to a "Racism in foo" page. ★Trekker (talk) 17:57, 20 March 2021 (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).

2011 Friends Life t20 templates

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 16:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Templates used once, should just be substed and deleted Joseph2302 (talk) 17:54, 20 March 2021 (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) 15:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused navbox with unknown purpose, maybe a test. Only other edits by creator are to User:Akuma1984/sandbox. Appears to be a modified copy of {{Morris Multimedia}}, {{Forum Communications}} and other navboxes. I haven't found a meaning of TVRADIOMED or 546654. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:39, 20 March 2021 (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) 15:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unusable in its current form. It may serve a better purpose when more notable subjects are known, but not when there's only one such notable driver. Jalen Folf (talk) 02:59, 20 March 2021 (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) 15:56, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unusable in its current form; typical navboxes are meant to link at least 4 subjects, and given Andorra's current borders, I do not see a change in the future that would warrant this template. Jalen Folf (talk) 02:58, 20 March 2021 (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) 15:57, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unusable in its current form; not enough available links for the subject and only link present in the template is a redlink. Jalen Folf (talk) 02:52, 20 March 2021 (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).

Redundant Template:Infobox court case wrappers

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

The result of the discussion was merge to Template:Infobox court case. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:58, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging the above with Template:Infobox court case.
Merge these redundant wrappers of {{Infobox court case}}, which just pass the parameters through untouched. Only difference, and only in some cases, is a preset value for |court= but this is redundant (should be set on the transclusion). Generally these have unmaintained and inadequate documentation, which is another reason why they're inferior. See this TfD for full rationale + precedent. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 02:22, 20 March 2021 (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).