Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 September 23

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) 17:26, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear that the creator's attempt to templateize lists of countries by various characteristics does not enjoy consensus, as it was reverted in most places. It should now be fully cleaned up (reverted in the few unwatched articles that still use these), and the templates deleted, not kept as a series of relics. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:27, 23 September 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. plicit 13:54, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Single-use trivial template, should be substed and deleted. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:12, 23 September 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) 17:26, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Variation on Template:Flaglist+link that should be deleted for the same reason Template:Flaglist+link was. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:12, 23 September 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. plicit 12:38, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:12, 23 September 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. plicit 13:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We should not encourage the social-media-like behavior of responding to posts with emojis and hiding the signature in a tooltip. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:12, 23 September 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. plicit 12:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused trivial template. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:12, 23 September 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. plicit 13:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We should not keep pre-Lua templates around as subpages; they can be viewed from the history if needed. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:12, 23 September 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. plicit 12:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused overly specific (despite its generic-seeming name) template. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:12, 23 September 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. plicit 13:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No stand-alone article to warrant a corresponding navbox. Japan's pro league (the bj league) is not considered a top pro league per NBASKETBALL and so their dunk contest is even less notable. SportsGuy789 (talk) 22:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Encyclopedia describes lower leagues. Encyclopaedia, also spelled encyclopedia, reference work that contains information on all branches of knowledge or that treats a particular branch of knowledge in a comprehensive manner. 61.11.188.241 (talk) 01:11, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is a blanket statement that simply describes what encyclopedias are for. But specifically on Wikipedia, any articles / templates must pass notability guidelines. Per NBASKETBALL, the bj league is not a top tier international league and therefore warrants further scrutiny. The navboxes also don't link to stand-alone parent articles. If those parent articles existed and pass GNG, this would not have been nominated for deletion. SportsGuy789 (talk) 17:37, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails the navigational purpose. I've nominated the other bj league template, Template:Bj league Three-Point Contest Winners for deletion for September 24 for failing under the same reasons. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete At a minimum, fails WP:NAVBOX No. 1: There should be a Wikipedia article on the subject of the template.Bagumba (talk) 10:22, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, fails WP:NAVBOX per above. Frietjes (talk) 14:30, 28 September 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. plicit 12:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dependent on <section /> markup on ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 and ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 which was removed from the source pages in October 2019, rendering these no longer usable. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:50, 23 September 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 relisted on 2021 October 1. plicit 13:06, 1 October 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. plicit 13:00, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Data Argentina is only used on User:Patrick/data A-G, which is a giant list that happens to include it because it exists, not a meaningful use. The rest are unused. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:45, 23 September 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 relisted on 2021 October 1. plicit 13:06, 1 October 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 relisted on 2021 October 1. plicit 12:57, 1 October 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. plicit 12:57, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The template was included in the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of living former United States senators, where the consensus was to cut. However, the template is still extant. 2601:241:300:B610:F1BA:AEF9:9050:8993 (talk) 22:27, 23 September 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. plicit 12:41, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NENAN – the band have only released two albums, which already link to each other through their respective infoboxes, so this navbox serves no additional purpose. It's very likely that the albums themselves are not notable anyway, but that's for another discussion. Richard3120 (talk) 22:13, 23 September 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. plicit 12:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. IznoPublic (talk) 20:59, 23 September 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. plicit 12:37, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just like the CS Dacia Maramureș squad nominated below. The team was renamed and subsequently folded. No need for this template anymore. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:01, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:39, 25 September 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. plicit 11:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ACSF Comuna Recea was proposed to pe renamed as CS Dacia Maramureș. Subsequently the club went bankrupt, so no need for a squad template anymore Rhinen (talk) 09:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:38, 25 September 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. plicit 03:35, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

originally nominated for speedy deletion by @Psypherium with the reason "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q14579 - There are no longer any articles transcluding this template." FASTILY 00:33, 23 September 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. plicit 03:35, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

originally nominated for speedy deletion by @Psypherium with the reason "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q14579 - There are no longer any articles transcluding this template." FASTILY 00:32, 23 September 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).