Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 September 12

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< September 11 September 13 >

September 12

edit

Template:Tlsd

edit
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 soft delete. Reasonable argument, no opposition. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. Primefac (talk) 17:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

With the deprecation of "tt" tags, now redundant with Template:Tlsc. Only a few transclusions, so it could be fully replaced and then deleted, unless there is a strong preference for redirecting. Bsherr (talk) 22:24, 12 September 2020 (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:Gateshead F.C. squad

edit
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) 17:12, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does not aid navigation. Redundant template JMHamo (talk) 21:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 21:25, 12 September 2020 (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:LOC-image/lang

edit
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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:05, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English Wikipedia; it's templates should not be (and aren't) localized into other languages * Pppery * it has begun... 21:11, 12 September 2020 (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:Uw-sandbox1

edit
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 2020 September 25. Primefac (talk) 00:28, 25 September 2020 (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:Taxonomy/سيلويڊورا

edit
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; deleted as G1 by Liz (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:06, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Non-English Taxonomy template, does not serve a purpose and "سيلويڊورا" does not appear to be a species. Chuka Chief (talk) 20:19, 12 September 2020 (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).

Non-English user warning templates not in "contrib" series

edit
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) 16:46, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike the "contrib" series of bilingual user warning templates or the bilingual welcome templates in Category:Non-English user warning templates, these templates do not specifically relate to non-English or poor English contributions. A user competent enough to navigate the English language interface should be competent to understand our English-language user warnings, or have the tools to translate them, such that we don't have to contravene WP:ENGLISHPLEASE ourselves when responding. Bsherr (talk) 18:20, 12 September 2020 (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:Dir

edit
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) 16:26, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous TfDs for this template:
Still has no use case on the English Wikipedia. G4 declined. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:17, 12 September 2020 (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:AR talk

edit
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 2020 September 25. Primefac (talk) 00:29, 25 September 2020 (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:Big Four (tennis)

edit
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 2020 September 25. Primefac (talk) 00:22, 25 September 2020 (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:Big Three

edit
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) 16:14, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't really add anything. The only three links are already in the article Big Three (tennis), and that link can be added to the See also sections of the three players. There are also lots of other Big Threes. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:12, 12 September 2020 (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:Fully blocked user

edit
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; deleted as G4 by Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 03:06, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See this TfD discussion. This is basically a duplicate of the old {{blocked user}} template. ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 02:38, 12 September 2020 (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:Hellcat Records

edit
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) 16:12, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough discrete, interconnected items to warrant a WP:NAVBOX czar 02:34, 12 September 2020 (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:Arab Capital of Culture

edit
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) 16:10, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Only 4 of the links are directly pertinent to the program. The remaining are miscellaneous cities that have been nominated/included as a 'capital'. The majority of uses are accordingly on the city articles.

I can also see reducing this down to just the years articles and accordingly removing from the cities articles (per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL). Izno (talk) 01:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm confused, what's the extraneous information in this template? There's only one entry per year, right? And, if Arab Capital of Culture is accurate at all, those are each of the "capitals of culture"? Do you mean that it shouldn't include the associated countries, or? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 16:47, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Here the cities are extraneous; kind of my direction is that this template is not defining for those cities, so why are they being included? Once you get rid of the cities, you're hanging out at 4 links of interest. --Izno (talk) 05:29, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a useful tool and probably notable enough to use to link the articles. The actual formatting of the template could be improved but that's not enough reason to delete. I think this is useful for readers.--Tom (LT) (talk) 07:54, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but reduce to years only and remove transclusions from cities. I agree, Izno. I checked to see if any of the cities articles contained sections on the topic, as a section link might also be appropriate, but none do; indeed, none except Constantine, Algeria even mention this distinction. So, notable: yes, probably. Defining: apparently not. Useful for navigation: not for the cities articles, to say nothing of the countries. --Bsherr (talk) 04:43, 17 September 2020 (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:Infobox province or territory of Canada

edit
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 2020 September 22. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PK2 (talk • contribs) 12:49, 22 September 2020 (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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_September_12&oldid=980166700"