Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
This page is about discussion of templates. For a list of templates used for discussion, see Wikipedia:List of discussion templates.
Find this page confusing? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!
XFD backlog
V Feb Mar Apr May Total
CfD 0 0 0 2 2
TfD 0 1 2 7 10
MfD 0 0 0 0 0
FfD 0 1 4 13 18
RfD 0 0 0 31 31
AfD 0 0 0 6 6
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

On this page, the deletion or merging of templates and modules, except as noted below, is discussed.

How to use this page

[edit]

What not to propose for discussion here

[edit]
Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

Stub templates
Stub templates and categories should be listed at Categories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories, unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
Userboxes
Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
Speedy deletion candidates
If the template clearly satisfies a criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{Db-author}}. See also WP:T5.
Policy or guideline templates
Templates that are associated with particular Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as the speedy deletion templates, cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant guideline.
Template redirects
List at Redirects for discussion.
Moving and renaming
Use Wikipedia:Requested moves.

Reasons to delete a template

[edit]
Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance.
  2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
  3. The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used.
  4. The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and it can't be fixed through normal editing.

Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, WikiProject Templates may be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.

Listing a template

[edit]
Shortcuts

To list a template for deletion or merging, adhere to the following three-step process. Utilizing Twinkle is strongly recommended as it automates and simplifies these steps. To use Twinkle, click TW in the toolbar (top right of the page), then select XFD. Do not include the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps, unless specifically instructed otherwise.

Step Instructions
I: Tag the template. Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:

Note:

  • If it is an inline template, do not add a newline between the TfD notice and the code of the template.
  • If the template to be nominated for deletion is protected, make a request for the TfD tag to be added, by posting on the template's talk page and using the {{editprotected}} template to catch the attention of administrators or template editors.
  • For templates designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template.
  • Do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
    or
    Nominated for merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]].
  • Before saving your edit, preview your edit to ensure the Tfd message is displayed properly.

Multiple templates: If you are nominating multiple related templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with {{subst:Tfd|heading=discussion title}} or {{subst:Tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}} instead of the versions given above, replacing discussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing the PAGENAME code).

Related categories: If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, add {{Catfd|template name}} to the top of any categories that would be deleted as a result of the TfD, this time replacing template name with the name of the template being nominated. (If you instead chose a meaningful title for a multiple nomination, use {{Catfd|header=title of nomination}} instead.)

TemplateStyles pages: The above templates will not work on TemplateStyles pages. Instead, add a CSS comment to the top of the page:

/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025_May_19#Template:template_name.css */
II: List the template at TfD. Edit today's TfD log and paste the following text to the top of the list:
  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add {{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without brackets|result of previous TfD}} directly after the |text= before the why (or alternatively, after the }} of the Tfd2/Catfd2).

Use an edit summary such as
Adding [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates: If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ). Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters | ), plus one more in |with=. |with= does not need to be used, but should be the template that you want the other templates to be merged into. Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

Related categories: If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code in the |text= field of the Tfd2 template but before the text of your rationale:

{{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
III: Notify users. Please notify the creator of the template nominated (as well as the creator of the target template, if proposing a merger). It is helpful to also notify the main contributors of the template that you are nominating. To find them, look in the page history or talk page of the template. Then, add one of the following:

to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of the other template for a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to make any interested WikiProjects aware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not use Article alerts. Deletion sorting lists are a possible way of doing that.

Multiple templates: There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination: please write a personal message in these cases.

Consider adding any templates you nominate for TfD to your watchlist. This will help ensure that the TfD tag is not removed.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors

[edit]

While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD (see above), nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give the criterion that it meets.

[edit]

WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{subst:Tfd notice}} for this.

Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's Article Alerts automatically, if they subscribe to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the template

[edit]

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the template and its talkpage that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the page history or talk page.

At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone else will either close the discussion or, where needed, "relist" it for another seven days of discussion. (That "someone" may not be you, the nominator.)

Once you have submitted a template here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is successful it will be added to the Holding Cell until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.

Also, consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

Twinkle

[edit]

Twinkle is a convenient tool that can perform many of the posting and notification functions automatically, with fewer errors and missed steps than manual editing. To use Twinkle, click its dropdown menu in the toolbar in the top right of the page: TW , and then click 'XFD'.

Note that Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them have automatic alerts. It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.

Discussion

[edit]

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the deletion policy and explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommend subst or subst and delete and similar. This means the template text should be "merged" into the articles that use it. Depending on the content, the template page may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.

Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussion

[edit]

Administrators should read the closing instructions before closing a nomination. Note that WP:XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

[edit]

May 19

[edit]

Template:Great Intelligence stories

[edit]

A recently redirected navbox for appearances of a Doctor Who character. Now that the character lacks an article, a navbox is not useful for navigational purposes and should be deleted. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 13:46, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PATCO Speedline stations

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, incoming links, or template parameters. Appears to be article content. Created in 2022. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Leland Bulldogs football navbox

[edit]

Navbox with no main article and no blue links in the body. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Humorgreen

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links. Redundant to {{Humor}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TfC submission/draft

[edit]

Unused and abandoned template in an irregular sub-page. Gonnym (talk) 10:12, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Time zone/zoneinfo

[edit]

Unused time zone sub-template. Gonnym (talk) 10:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Unused time zone sub-template. Gonnym (talk) 10:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Portland Hearts of Pine

[edit]

This team played its first match in March 2025. There are not enough articles to justify a navbox yet. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:06, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Despite the team being new, there are four articles linked by the navbox already, and that is likely to grow if a list of players is created or as the team has more seasons. I’m also not aware of a strict minimum number of articles Brindille1 (talk) 12:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Br separated en dash

[edit]

This template's only use was to separate a daterange in table cells (and was only used in 1 article). This use was only for manually visually formatting table contents. It violates MOS:DATERANGE; manual breaks are bad for accessibility MOS:ACCESS, interrupt the flow of screen readers, making their use particularly problematic in the only case this template was used in.  — sbb (talk) 00:59, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

note from nominator: example of usage with and without this template, see:
This was the only article using this template.  — sbb (talk) 01:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see how this violates DATERANGE; this is essentially equivalent to an snd, just with brs instead of spaces, and I find an snd to be somewhat ugly in a table (especially one with limited space). While I was unaware brs messed up screen readers, surely there is a way to emulate the break with CSS (thus not messing up screen readers while keeping it the same visually)? Also note there are articles which use the syntax <br />–<br /> manually (ie list of presidents of the United States). Diverging Diamond (is Queen of Hearts's alt; talk) 08:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument, when the other stuff also violates the MoS. If you disagree with the MoS, get it changed, then you can create templates to follow that style. Gonnym (talk) 12:39, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfortunately, there really isn't a way to do linebreaks with CSS, that don't introduce all sorts of layout issues, inconsistencies between browsers, etc.
  • Manual linebreaks are generally bad use (WP:LINEBREAK). In the linked examples (where you applied them), it completely prevents the HTML renderer from deciding if the line even needed to be wrapped (wide browser screen). Furthermore, placing the en-dash on its own line violates the MOS rule of keeping punctuation (including those with space before, like en-dashes and ellipsis) together with the text that precedes it.
 — sbb (talk) 13:41, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 18

[edit]

Template:Film draft edit notice

[edit]

No transclusions. Proposed in 2018, but apparently never adopted. It is possible that a more general template is used instead. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:10, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Because {{Draft notice}} exists and any mainspace redirects with relevant drafts may be linked to via tagging them with {{R with possibilities}} instead. Trailblazer101 (talk) 15:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 17

[edit]

Template:Book of the Week

[edit]

Navbox with an unsourced main article and no blue links in the body. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:52, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Related links were deleted here. Gonnym (talk) 17:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 16

[edit]

Template:Championnat National 2 Group D

[edit]

There is no longer a "Group D" for Championnat National 2, and this template is therefore obsolete. Groups A, B, and C still exist and are updated to the latest season. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:14, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National Patriotic Education Bases in Xinjiang

[edit]

This template appears to fail WP:TG. No documented clarity on usage and scope. Amigao (talk) 21:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tarot

[edit]

Unused template. Gonnym (talk) 10:12, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:29, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Nova Scotia Radio Markets

[edit]

No transclusions or documentation. The previous TFD was about the cross-namespace linking that these templates enable, not the lack of use. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:30, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Constituency representative

[edit]

No transclusions or incoming links to explain why it exists. Created in March 2025. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:25, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FK Ventspils squad

[edit]

Defunct club, its article states it was dissolved in 2024. Pelmeen10 (talk) 11:03, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UK London UNESCO World Heritage Sites image map

[edit]

Unused image template. Gonnym (talk) 09:22, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Possible Canada COTW

[edit]

Unused template for a process that hasn't been active since 2006 and had the rest of its templates previously deleted here. Gonnym (talk) 09:19, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:History of China/styles.css

[edit]

Unused style template. Gonnym (talk) 09:14, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Span style

[edit]

The templates that used this were deleted here. Gonnym (talk) 09:11, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Automatic taxobox/floating intro

[edit]

Unused taxobox template. The template is in a commented out code in Module:Biota infobox. 14 years and unused probably means it's not needed. Gonnym (talk) 08:58, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Retailers in Turkey

[edit]

Very incomplete template, nearly unreadable and full of external links. Not of any value The Banner talk 02:47, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If these sub-navboxes are needed, they should be split into their own templates. Some, like "Automotive parts", are just non-links. Non-links, excessive red links, section links, redirects, and external links, should all be removed. Gonnym (talk) 08:53, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 15

[edit]

Template:NFL games

[edit]

Navbox with no transclusions and no main article. Created in February 2025. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:05, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Just add it to the corresponding articles? jp×g🗯️ 19:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A single token transclusion means this fails WP:BIDIRECTIONAL. This also shows zero efforts by the creator or any interested editor in actually using this navigation template. Gonnym (talk) 08:47, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Electorates of the Australian House of Representatives interactive map (2022)

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, incoming links from discussions, or template parameters. Created in February 2025. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just added transclusion. –twotwofourtysix(talk || edits) 04:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Police and crime commissioner by-elections

[edit]

Unused new navbox redundant to {{2014 United Kingdom local elections}} and {{2021 United Kingdom local elections}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:02, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Those templates, {{Police and crime commissioner by-elections}} and {{2014 United Kingdom local elections}}/{{2021 United Kingdom local elections}}, are doing different things. The navbox is in use. Bondegezou (talk) 09:01, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2025–26 Champ Rugby Table

[edit]

Not needed. I improved the table and directly placed it onto the page this template is for. If the table wanted to be used on any other article, Template:Section can be used Louis (talk) (contribs) 22:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per common practice. Gonnym (talk) 08:50, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:McCune-Reischauer romanization of Korean

[edit]

See the other deletion req for {{Revised Romanization of Korean}}, same rationale (sorry should have bundled these together). This template is unused and was created before our recent MOS:KO and WP:NCKO, which discourage the practices outlined in this template. In other words, this template will never really be appropriate for any article. The contradiction is that this template says that an entire article should use a consistent romanization system, but our manuals of style discourage that practice and instead break down romanization practices by term. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 15:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Revised Romanization of Korean

[edit]

Unused and was created before our recent MOS:KO and WP:NCKO, which discourage the practices outlined in this template. In other words, this template will never really be appropriate for any article. The contradiction is that this template says that an entire article should use a consistent romanization system, but our manuals of style discourage that practice and instead break down romanization practices by term. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 15:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Babel en-Shaw-1

[edit]

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links. The name and category do not appear to match the content. This may be an abandoned experiment. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:28, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Hundred (men's competition) results summary

[edit]

No transclusions or incoming links. Created in January 2025. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WEC tracks

[edit]

Unused timeline-navbox template. Gonnym (talk) 12:54, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Homeschooling Collaboration

[edit]

Unused template for a process that hasn't been used since 2010. Gonnym (talk) 12:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Political Parties Collaboration

[edit]

Unused template for a process that hasn't been used since 2008. Gonnym (talk) 12:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite case/TemplateData

[edit]

Unused after being subst into the template doc page here. Gonnym (talk) 12:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Great Backlog Drive 2

[edit]

Unused templates for a process that is no longer active. Gonnym (talk) 10:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TCDD District 1

[edit]

Unused route template. Gonnym (talk) 10:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2024–25 European Aquatics Euro Cup Finals

[edit]

Unused as 2024–25 European Aquatics Euro Cup#Final uses the table directly. Gonnym (talk) 10:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Altaria

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 G7 by Pppery (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the main article, Altaria (band), only 2 band members has an article. All albums lack articles. Mika1h (talk) 08:28, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:TAFI Reminder

[edit]

Unused and seems to be one-time messages that didn't need to be in a template in the first place. Gonnym (talk) 08:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I created both these templates way back when. Both of them were subst-ed to people's talk pages, if I remember correctly. I am happy with both of them being deleted now. Soni (talk) 09:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Unused as the template was reverted here. Gonnym (talk) 08:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I made that template because there isn't anything Wikipedia-specific on the table and I thought it might be useful in articles about copyright. Just`Existing 00:51, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Partial/styles.css

[edit]

Unused style template. Gonnym (talk) 08:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Related to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 216#Some issues in dark 2022 theme. I do not see a need to copy-paste myself from there. Snævar (talk) 23:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Party shading/Sarvajana Balaya

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 G7 by Pppery (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused political party color template. Gonnym (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Party shading/People's Progressive Party (Malaysia)

[edit]

Unused political party color template. Gonnym (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to keep this one. As it serve usage on by election in Malaya/Malaysia from 1953 to 1973. If this is remove, the party color in election box result will be white, which is incorrect. Mrpresidentfaris (talk) 03:18, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Party shading/Minnesota Nonpartisan Independent Republican

[edit]

Unused political party color template. Gonnym (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Party shading/Independent (US)/current

[edit]

Unused political party color template. Gonnym (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would actually like to keep this one. There is someone who keeps going through and changing all instances of "Independent (US)" to "Independent" and therefore removing instances of this template. WMSR (talk) 12:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Parti Negara/meta/shading

[edit]

Unused political party color template. Gonnym (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to keep this one. As it serve usage on by election in Malaya/Malaysia from 1954 to 1967. If this is remove, the party color in election box result will be white, which is incorrect. Mrpresidentfaris (talk) 03:17, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California Progressive Party/meta/shading

[edit]

Unused political party color template. Gonnym (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Alaska TV Markets

[edit]

Unused TV navigation-related template. Probably orphaned after recent changes to related templates. Gonnym (talk) 08:06, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 14

[edit]

Template:I Declare War

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 speedy delete. CSD G7 Liz Read! Talk! 06:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox with no transclusions. All links in the body redirect to the main article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:45, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:NASCAR Mexico T4 Series 2007

[edit]

To me, this looks like a navigation box with no articles to navigate between, and should therefore be deleted. Geschichte (talk) 18:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:EuroLeague Playoffs and Play-in MVP

[edit]

Navbox with no transclusions, sources, or main article. Only two links in the body. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will make an article today about the award, just give me some time. I already wrote one today about the Flight Time award. Zdremon (talk) 17:08, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mdy category

[edit]

Unused maintenance templates. Seems Template:Monthly clean-up category/Messages/Type/Use mdy dates is the one used. Gonnym (talk) 11:25, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever happens to this one should be paralleled in Template:Dmy category I presume. I don't really get why that one is still used but this one no longer is, but I'm not going to dive into the module rabbithole to see when, how, and why this was changed. I don't believe that Template:Monthly clean-up category/Messages/Type/Use mdy dates has anything to do with this though, that is just a text message, not the complete template with a counter and so on included. Fram (talk) 11:45, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see: someone updated all the mdy categories earlier this year[1], but not the dmy categories. So, I guess that these should be made parallel again, either by reverting the mdy cats or by changing the dmy cats. The fate of this template depends on what gets chosen. Fram (talk) 11:49, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seems User:AnomieBOT creates new categories with {{Monthly clean-up category}} (see Category:Use dmy dates from July 2017), so the rest of the categories should be switched as well. Gonnym (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Which way do we want to standardize this? In favor of {{Monthly clean-up category}} (even though these aren't really cleanup categories in the standard sense), or in favor of separate templares?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 14:53, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Zal Batmanglij

[edit]

Links to two films; does not meet guidelines at MOS:FILM#Navigation. DoubleCross (‡) 14:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Canadian soccer team seasons

[edit]

After my proposal to merge all the listicle navboxes into one failed, I'm now proposing to delete {{Canadian soccer team seasons}}, as it's redundant to {{Major League Soccer seasons}} – three of the four articles are listed in both. In the previous discussion, two editors raised doubt that readers would want to navigate between listicles in what they perceived to be unrelated leagues / league systems. Following that logic, there would likely be doubt too that readers would want to navigate between the three MLS listicles and List of Ottawa Fury FC seasons.

Pinging Brindille1, GiantSnowman, PeeJay, Mediocre Legacy, RedBlueGreen93, and SounderBruce – the former three as participants in the previous discussion, and the latter three as major contributors to this navbox and the four articles listed in it. This discussion has also been listed in WikiProject Football's list of page discussions. — AFC Vixen 🦊 14:03, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support I’m open to supporting the recreation of this navbox once there are and CPL team season lists. But right now, this navbox is three Canadian MLS teams and a defunct CPL team. Agree that this has minimal value at the moment Brindille1 (talk) 14:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Scarlett Stevens

[edit]

Redundant, always appears with {{San Cisco}} on the same page, except one article, Tightrope (Illy song), which does not justify a nav template. Muhandes (talk) 13:33, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --woodensuperman 14:19, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Platformization

[edit]

The author created a blank template. I marked it for speedy deletion for this reason, as I do a few times a week, but this speedy was denied. So TfD, I guess. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:19, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is obviously not a template. This is either G7 as author blanked (as they created an empty template), or a G2 as a test. Whatever this is, it should never be in the template namespace. Gonnym (talk) 13:45, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. I'll just consider this one a test template --Lenticel (talk) 22:01, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies to all. I have modified the template in response to feedback received from @Jonesey95. I do hope that the template is suitable. Thanks for the assistance. Derek J Moore (talk) 09:25, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even the parent article Education by algorithm is a redlink, should create it first. Vestrian24Bio 12:09, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. It’s being addressed? Thoughts on the content will be appreciated. Derek J Moore (talk) 16:35, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The template now has content on it, so now it is no longer a test page. Editors should discuss the content.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Techie3 (talk) 10:05, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hush (film series)

[edit]

Well linked within articles, we do not need a navbox for this. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 08:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 13

[edit]

Template:Infernäl Mäjesty

[edit]

In addition to the main article, Infernäl Mäjesty, only two albums have articles. Template:Infobox album already links between the two albums, this template is unnecessary. Mika1h (talk) 21:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Promising draft

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Promising draft with Template:AfC postpone G13.
These two templates have the same stated purpose: identifying promising drafts and requesting that they be preserved beyond the standard G13 limit. {{Promising draft}} is newer but better documented, more widely used, and includes a banner notice (which seems like a useful element). Sdkb talk 19:16, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Db-redirnonebot

[edit]

No transclusions. It is unclear whether this template is still used as a temporary CSD tag, since it has no documentation. It was definitely used back in 2012 when this BRFA was filed and approved. There is a bunch of discussion about the template, most of which says something like "this other template can be modified to do the same thing as this template". Pppery asserts that the bot in the BRFA is not tagging redirects anymore. I think this template may no longer be needed, but more information may be needed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:25, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Danish India

[edit]

Unused sidebar whose relevant links could probably be merged into a restructured {{Danish overseas empire}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Strip nomobile

[edit]

This hack lets navboxes be read on mobile, however, in every single case this was used in an article, the article reading experience is worse than with a standard table, and since references are never used in navboxes, then using these in articles leads to a giant block of unsourced data. Delete template and remove usages of navboxes mid-article, where used. Gonnym (talk) 13:59, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. The whole work around the WMF until it works just plainly sucks. Izno (talk) 18:39, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, possibly restricting to non-mainspace with {{main other}}. The template has been used poorly, but it also has legitimate use-cases – it's a tool like {{strip categories}}. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:05, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This template simply isn't necessary outside of (our) mainspace; the relevant code rips out content with certain classes (nomobile, navbox, vertical-navbox) only in content namespaces, of which we have only one: main. Izno (talk) 23:11, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Page creator here. Your statement doesn't seem to be correct as the demo linked in the documentation is in User: namespace. And it's legitimately used in that namespace:

    This is a local userspace copy of the code used by Template:Strip nomobile, which as of the time I am writing this page, is at risk of deletion. As my userpage relies on the existence of this code for its functionality on mobile (specifically with User:NegativeMP1/Contributions box), I have archived it here for my own personal use.

    — NegativeMP1, User:NegativeMP1/nomobile

    It can also be useful for testing purposes. Keep. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 02:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The relevant code:
    The reason why it is not present on that page is instead simple CSS hiding the content. And indeed, in the rendered page of interest is 
    <table id="Container" role="presentation" class="nomobile toccolours searchaux"> ... </table>
    In namespaces other than the main namespace, simple TemplateStyles can be used to unhide the relevant content, whether exploratory or otherwise.
    I was precise in what I said regarding where MobileFrontend removes this content. Izno (talk) 02:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It's been a while so thanks for refreshing my memory. Using TemplateStyles does bring some complications. It seems you can't create the needed .css in userspace:
    Page User:Alexis Jazz/Nomobile.css must have content model "Sanitized CSS" for TemplateStyles (current model is "CSS"). Changing the content model can be requested using {{edit interface-protected}} on the talk page.
    Beyond that, if you were to use TemplateStyles to force-display nomobile, if I'm not mistaken, it would render all elements with nomobile visible on that page, not just the ones you actually want. This could be solved with the introduction of some new class with the end result being that usage will be so cumbersome it'll require a template. And that TemplateStyles would have to do something like .nomobile{display:unset !important} or .nomobile{display:block !important}, but to the best of my knowledge such a solution overrides what nomobile does, whereas {{strip nomobile}} actually removes the nomobile class from whatever it encapsulates. If you want display to be what it would be if there was no nomobile class, frankly I wouldn't know how to make that happen using TemplateStyles. But if that is possible, I'd appreciate being enlightened. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 03:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, it's not just navboxes but also useful templates like {{Life timeline}} that require {{Strip nomobile}} to be displayed in articles. And re: references, there's a way to do this in a P&G-compliant way by simply including a cite after the template for cases where all the info is cited to one source.
I'm very interested in improving the article-reading experience, and would prefer to also have a template that converts navboxes to tables so we don't have to duplicate information. It's a relatively common practice to include navboxes in articles; see e.g. Mauritania at the Africa Cup of Nations#Squads, the issue is just in most of those cases the sections are completely unreadable on mobile. So while I agree using {{strip nomobile}} sometimes isn't ideal and we should work on improving those articles, there are valid use cases and it's always better than having a blank page anyways. --Habst (talk) 00:19, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Life timeline probably doesn't need nomobile at this point. It was probably added there because collapsing wasn't supported by mobile, but it is now. Izno (talk) 00:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but as long as there are features that are locked out of the mobile view, there will always be a use-case for {{strip nomobile}}. The specifics of which templates are using those features at the moment can change and doesn't really affect the core issue. --Habst (talk) 02:46, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The core issue is that this template papers over what in most cases is an incorrect use of a template, categorically. The cited navboxes should not be used in the sections they are in, and that's the only case where this template is being used in mainspace.
There may be specific templates that need assistance, but what they definitely need is to ditch nomobile in most cases. Collapsing (or lack thereof) is no longer a sufficient reason to deny users access to whatever information, on any page, and not just the ones where someone has said "strip nomobile" should be employed here. So it goes for what I anticipate are most casual uses of the nomobile class. And separately, if any template is using one of the navbox classes and it's not derived from {{sidebar}} or {{navbox}}, it basically shouldn't be at this point (since I went through multiple years ago and removed classes used outside those templates). And uses otherwise are basically otherwise misuses of this {{strip nomobile}}.
IOW, remove navbox/vertical-navbox where it appears outside the relevant templates, remove uses of templates that are being misused (as in the cited example above), and remove nomobile everywhere that isn't navbox related (with potential replacement with WP:TemplateStyles. This template is simply technical debt and should be deleted for that reason if no others.
It is currently used on only some 50 templates and modules. We can most assuredly get that down to many fewer.
I will add "remove nomobile" to MediaWiki talk:Common.css/to do regardless. There are a few templates/modules where it is appropriate and necessary and this workaround simply shouldn't exist for those cases anyway (navboxes/sidebars). Izno (talk) 04:42, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Strip nomobile/navboxmobile.css

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 G7 by Izno (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 04:03, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused after this edit. Gonnym (talk) 13:49, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Samastipur-Darbhanga-Raxaul-Gorakhpur line

[edit]

Unused route template. Gonnym (talk) 13:36, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Made this template to gave more information about this section of the Barauni-Gorakhpur, Raxaul and Jainagar lines to gave more information about this section. But due to my regular works like studying, i can't complete this on time. Abdullah1099 (talk) 13:42, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Party shading/UMNO

[edit]

Unused color template. Gonnym (talk) 13:34, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox weather event/Watches and warnings parameter

[edit]

Unused {{Infobox weather event}} sub-template. Gonnym (talk) 13:33, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox weather event/Watches and warnings

[edit]

Unused {{Infobox weather event}} sub-template. Gonnym (talk) 13:33, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox weather event/PNGNWS

[edit]

Unused {{Infobox weather event}} sub-template. Gonnym (talk) 13:33, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox weather event/Satellite tornadoes

[edit]

Unused {{Infobox weather event}} sub-template. Gonnym (talk) 13:32, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox referendum/map

[edit]

Unused sub-template. Gonnym (talk) 13:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox avionics/styles.css

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 G7 by Izno (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 20:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused style template. Gonnym (talk) 13:27, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Several articles currently use this template, and the style sheet is used by those articles. Deleting this stylesheet would adversely impact all of those pages and any future pages where the template is applied. — TadgStirkland401 (TadgTalk) 15:13, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TadgStirkland401 You never added the stylesheet to the template, so it is in fact not in use. Izno (talk) 18:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Izno, thank you, but I don't completely understand. When I view the template used directly on the /doc page (for the AN/APQ-20), I see the proper styles applied there. I also see it when I view on other pages. Before deleting it, let me see what needs to be done to edit the template itself to include it. — TadgStirkland401 (TadgTalk) 18:43, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Please disregard my previous comments. I see my error in editing the template. It is okay to delete this stylesheet. — TadgStirkland401 (TadgTalk) 18:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Infobox Asian Games event/games text

[edit]

Unused sub-template. Couldn't find usages in an insource search either. Gonnym (talk) 13:23, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Holidays of Estonia

[edit]

Unused as Public holidays in Estonia uses different tables. Gonnym (talk) 13:21, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chinese Calendar

[edit]

Unused calendar template. Gonnym (talk) 13:16, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CelestialRef/workpage

[edit]

Unused very old stale sandbox template. Gonnym (talk) 13:16, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CelestialRef/test/Extras

[edit]

Unused sub-page of a previous sandbox version (not a testcase test). Gonnym (talk) 13:14, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Footer World Junior Mixed Doubles Curling Champions

[edit]

The first ever edition of this event, the 2025 World Junior Mixed Doubles Curling Championship, does not need a navbox. There are no articles to navigate among. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:41, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Election candidate

[edit]

No transclusions or incoming links to explain why it exists. Created in January 2025. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:10, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


May 12

[edit]

Template:LeaveMessageIntro

[edit]

Unused recently created template that shouldn't be supported. Not the content of the notice but also not the notice itself. Gonnym (talk) 21:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is any reason to delete... not every template needs to be useful.. I use it on my talk page.. what's your reasoning for nominating it? Alexnewmon2623 (talk) 01:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aggressive tone, incorrect rules, doing something worse than the default system. Is that enough? Gonnym (talk) 08:36, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Namespace number

[edit]

Unused, broken, and duplicates Template:Namespaces. Gonnym (talk) 19:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Stub improvement/Word count

[edit]

Unused template (which was incorrectly created as a sub template). This just repeats Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_improvement#What_is_a_stub?. There is no real need for this. Gonnym (talk) 18:51, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Reading List/ArticleForm/Header

[edit]

Unused sub-templates. Gonnym (talk) 18:46, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Go ahead and delete please. I didn't end up using them in my reading list template. Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RErenik

[edit]

Unused Infobox river succession template. Gonnym (talk) 18:44, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ouigo

[edit]

Unused route template. Gonnym (talk) 18:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sonic the Hedgehog chronology

[edit]

I don't see any point in having this template. While some individual Sonic games like Adventure 2, Unleashed, Shadow, and most recently Frontiers have story as a major element, and obviously there's stuff like licensed comics with narrative focus, most Sonic games have only very simple narratives and story simply isn't that important to the big picture of the franchise, especially as concerns Wikipedia's coverage. The story that the franchise does have has been subject to frequent significant retcons. While Sega has hired prolific Sonic comics writer Ian Flynn to work on the games and established a "lore team" to keep track of it all (which can be covered in an out of universe fashion in an appropriate location) and consequently newer games do give more attention to continuity, this is a relatively recent development and could and likely will change whenever Sega decides they'd like a different creative direction for the franchise, and we don't need to keep track of all that. We are not Fandom. silviaASH (inquire within) 18:38, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Other timeline templates (Zelda, Metal Gear, Kingdom Hearts, etc.) have secondary sources discussing their chronologies to justify their existence, while this template only has a single primary citation that is itself incomplete. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 19:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - the franchise is not story-heavy, and doesn't make much particular sense without any sort of context to string the titles together. (Relatively certain it was created with some WP:OR/WP:SYNTH logic as well.) Sergecross73 msg me 20:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The source lists each of the games in the order they happen (minus some lore details), complete with appropriate box art; therefore, OR is not a factor. Additionally, external context is used in the cases of other series with timeline templates such as Zelda and Metroid, both of which have even less focus on story and connectivity. Mumbai0618 (talk) 15:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What source? Where? And why is a template incapable of explaining any of this to the reader the right means of conveying this information to the reader? Sergecross73 msg me 00:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The “Sonic World Story” source at the very top that the entire template is based on. What else would I be referring to? Mumbai0618 (talk) 03:32, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No idea, as you did not provide a WP:DIF. Sergecross73 msg me 11:05, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Pretty sure the source is this page cited at the top of the template. Which, as I said before, is both a primary source and an incomplete timeline, so it doesn't make for a great source anyway. When the Metal Gear and Kingdom Hearts timeline templates were nominated for deletion a few years ago, they stuck around because there was no shortage of reliable secondary sources discussing their chronologies. Sonic doesn't have that. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 19:20, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per others. There's no real need for this template when the timeline isn't something that a template is inherently needed for. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 15:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Another concern is that the timeline is, for the most part, fairly linear and similar to release structure. Sure, Sonic Mania, Sonic Superstars, and Sonic 4 are placed before Adventure, but Adventure is followed by Adventure 2, Heroes, Shadow, Sonic 06, Unleashed, Colors, Lost World, Forces, and Frontiers. For 2D, with few exceptions, the chronological order is also identical to release order. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't really see this as a convincing argument. Metroid is basically this, where the Prime games are all wedged in-between 1 and 2, and Other M is moved before Fusion. This series' chronology, if only by virtue of having way more entries, is inherently more jumbled up, and the examples you cited ignore non-mainline entires whose release order does get mixed up in the template. Mumbai0618 (talk) 15:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. However, I think we need to clean it up slightly. For starters, to address Cyberlink's concerns, I suggest we put it in a separate section (a la Zelda) and cite further sources such as the Encyclo-Speed-ia and Ian Flynn's podcast. We should also highlight that the source in question is still a work in progress from SEGA themselves (though I can acknowledge deleting the template on the grounds of it being incomplete). I'll address the rest individually.Mumbai0618 (talk) 15:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)Mumbai0618[reply]
    Ian Flynn's podcast is not useful here, as it is not an authoritative source on the matter to the standards that Wikipedia would require. The Bumblekast is self-published by Flynn and his co-host Kyle Crouse and things he said there would only be useful for WP:ABOUTSELF statements about himself and out-of-universe things he directly worked on (like "I wrote this storyline this way because of this idea" or "I personally think this about x Sonic game or comic") and only where WP:DUE. They've both directly stressed multiple times that the podcast is essentially two guys shooting the shit and Flynn has frequently qualified much of what he's said about in-universe Sonic details with "This is just my headcanon, Sega decides the rules, I just work for them" (and as noted in a footnote that I added to his article, he's since stopped commenting on Sonic stuff at all to avoid stepping on his employers' toes).
    The Encyclo-Speed-ia is a stronger source, since it had to be approved by Sega folks before publication, but it's ultimately still a primary source and still subject to retcons. Given how prone Sega themselves have been to flip-flopping on what is and isn't part of the official canon, I don't think we can consider covering any of this in this level of detail, at least not without some high-quality independent secondary sources discussing it. silviaASH (inquire within) 16:11, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    "We should also highlight that the source in question is still a work in progress from SEGA themselves" - How? It's a template. There's no means of providing that sort of context in this format. It's all the more reason that a template isn't the right way to portray this information. Sergecross73 msg me 00:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I was suggesting we make note of it in the main Sonic the Hedgehog article, not in the template. Mumbai0618 (talk) 03:30, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The template's creator had the intention of putting the template in every single article that's listed in the template, as that's how templates generally work. So context written in the parent article would not be visible to anyone viewing it from Sonic Generations], for example. Sergecross73 msg me 11:11, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it is only used on one article page. SeaDragon1 (talk) 14:35, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Navbox documentation/sandbox/content

[edit]

Unused and unclear sandbox version. Gonnym (talk) 18:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was from this version and this was a consideration of mine to create the template accordingly, but this was not desired. Kim Kelting • talk 18:51, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NCAA Division I FBS football ranking movements/testcases/fakedata

[edit]

This test data isn't used in the testcases. Gonnym (talk) 18:34, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Monthly clean-up category/Type

[edit]

Unused and also not linked from anywhere templates. Gonnym (talk) 18:29, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Monthly clean-up category/Messages

[edit]

This doc page was linked to from the parent template. I've added this doc directly there to keep all the information on the same page. Gonnym (talk) 18:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hughes-SteamLocosIndia2

[edit]

Unused reference template other than in one sandbox. Subst there and delete template. Gonnym (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hughes-SteamLocosIndia1

[edit]

Unused reference template. Gonnym (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sophia Takal

[edit]

Links to two films; doesn't meet guidelines at MOS:FILM#Navigation. DoubleCross (‡) 18:17, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kieran Darcy-Smith

[edit]

Links to two films; doesn't meet guidelines at MOS:FILM#Navigation. DoubleCross (‡) 18:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chinese Time

[edit]

Unused time template. Gonnym (talk) 18:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Calculator-superimpose

[edit]

Unused calculator-related template. Gonnym (talk) 18:12, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was made as an experiment after a discussion, but then ended up not being used. If people are ok with it, i'd ask that it be moved to my userspace instead of straight up deleted. Bawolff (talk) 18:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Brand isn't unreleased

[edit]

Unused and useable template. There is no brand-related article where you'd put this. Gonnym (talk) 18:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Basketballbox/styles.css

[edit]

Unused style template. Gonnym (talk) 18:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a perfect candidate to go. Pedantical (talk) 00:46, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BMI calculator/bmi.css

[edit]

Unused after this edit. Gonnym (talk) 18:08, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup sure, Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not needed. Display will stay the same if deleted. SeaDragon1 (talk) 14:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:420 Men & Mixed World Championship medallists

[edit]

420 World Championships uses the tables directly. Gonnym (talk) 18:05, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Trans-text

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This newly created translation template should not be used and instead. We have the {{lang}} and {{langx}} templates for this. And for usage in citations, consult the citation templates on how to correctly do that. Gonnym (talk) 09:31, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Old discussions

[edit]

May 10

Template:Griffons squad

[edit]

Team no longer competes in a the top division of the Currie Cup. The majority of links are redirects also. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:35, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Campaignbox Russo–German conflicts

[edit]

Propose deleting per MOS:CAMPAIGN—these conflicts do not constitute a "particular campaign, front, theater or war", but are unrelated to each other. Related recent precedents:

See also deletion discussion of duplicate Template:Russo–German conflicts at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 May 2#Template:Russo–German conflicts (will be deleted soon).
NLeeuw (talk) 17:57, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women's regional cricket templates

[edit]

Regional teams have been replaced by county sides for the 2025 season onwards, so these current squads templates are obsolete given the teams no longer compete. The Blaze squad template has been left as they still compete in this new format. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:16, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikicite

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Wikicite with Template:SfnRef inline.
{{SfnRef inline}} and {{wikicite}} both allow the shortened footnotes created by Module:Footnotes to link to a full citation that is either handwritten or transcluding a template that does not yet create an anchor for short citations.

Wikicite can:

  1. Be placed after the full citation.
  2. Wrap around the full citation which creates popup tooltips on mouseover and highlights the full citation when clicked, similar to standard references.

SfnRef inline can:

  1. Be placed after the full citation.

I am proposing a merge rather than a redirect because SfnRef inline also:

  • Has the more clear name and should likely be the post-merge title. Wikicite's partner template {{wikiref}}, was deleted 15 years ago because it was never widely used.
  • Accepts the same numerical parameters as Module:Footnotes does in more common templates like {{sfn}}, {{harv}}, {{sfnp}}, and so on.
  • Has more clear documentation.

Both templates have the same code in their sandbox and testcases. If you have a "harv" errors script installed, you should be able to quickly see the differences in anchor creation on the testcases below. If you don't have any error script for shortened footnotes, you'll need to click the links in the "Short citations for testing examples below" to see the difference.

Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 13:40, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't think that placing either of these after the full citation can be correct. For accessibility reasons, if nothing else, the emitted anchor should really be before the citation; and that is what happens when {{wikicite}} uses its |reference= parameter to enclose the full citation. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Redrose64, that's a good point, and one of many things to address in the documentation. It wouldn't affect how the transcluded template is written, though, would it? Rjjiii (talk) 00:49, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding 2. Wrap around the full citation which creates popup tooltips on mouseover and highlights the full citation when clicked, similar to standard references., will this be lost with this merge? I'm rather a fan of this feature, so I wouldn't be thrilled to see it go. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:17, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Michael Aurel, it will not be lost; the feature would be added to {{SfnRef inline}}. Check out the sandbox examples at Template:Wikicite/testcases. The merge would result in both of the below options to wrap the full citation: 
    • {{wikicite |ref={{sfnref|Buchanan|2023}} |reference=Buchanan, Abigail. (14 November 2023). "We are making bagpipes sexy again: Inside the late Queen's beloved Scottish music school". ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'') }}

    • {{wikicite|Buchanan|2023 |reference=Buchanan, Abigail. (14 November 2023). "We are making bagpipes sexy again: Inside the late Queen's beloved Scottish music school". ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'') }}
    Rjjiii (talk) 01:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Great, thanks for the clarification. No issues in my book, then. – Michael Aurel (talk) 02:05, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merger, in every respect discussed above. This is a +5 Plan of Goodness.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:16, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I suggest to merge the other way: {{SfnRef inline}} -> {{Wikicite}} because a) the former has less than a dozen transclusions, the latter >2200; b) the name part "inline" doesn't describe how Wikicite is used, which is in the "Sources" section of articles, along with standard specific citation template, like {{Cite book}}, {{Cite journal}}. Checking 2 articles that use {{SfnRef inline}}, it's used there also in that section, not inline. The suggested new functionality of separating the citation anchor from the citation itself is a step backwards. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Michael Bednarek, thanks for the response. To better understand your positions, are you saying:
    1. That the merged template should be titled {{wikicite}} or something similar to {{Cite book}}? For transparency, there was another rarely used template called Template:Cite plain.
    2. That the merged template should continue to support wrapping the full citation, or that it should only support wrapping the full citation and existing transclusions of {{SfnRef inline}} should be converted to the {{wikicite|ref=}} format?
    Rjjiii (talk) 03:46, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    1.: Yes, it should be named {{wikicite}} because that's the overwhelmingly used name now.
    2.: Of course the merged template must continue to support wrapping the full citation. I'm indifferent (though disapproving) to the current possibility of {{SfnRef inline}} to stand alone. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 8

Template:Politics of ancient Rome

[edit]

There is no reason to deprecate a sidebar template. It either is useful and the deprecation template should be removed, or it should be replaced and the template deleted. Gonnym (talk) 22:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: this template has been in use for twenty years, has been regularly maintained, and is, if I understand the statistics correctly, used in about ninety different articles. The "deprecation" message says that it should be replaced by one of two other templates—only one of which currently seems to exist. At the very least, this move seems premature. P Aculeius (talk) 12:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It appears that this notice was placed after a discussion on the template's talk page, but the rest of the process was not carried out. Pinging @Ifly6, Biz, and T8612:, the participants in that discussion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:38, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is there some other way to say "don't use this template, use these other templates"? The deprecation convention I am used to is persist-indefinitely. The number of pages on which that sidebar was semi-mindlessly dumped is very long. There was general agreement that the combined approach had gradually accumulated into a cruft of barely organised links. As to the replacement templates, I created the republican one; I am not an expert on the imperial period and deferred to others for creation of that sidebar. Ifly6 (talk) 20:12, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, send it here. Never place a deprecation template randomly as it does nothing to solve the problem that you wanted to solve. Gonnym (talk) 20:05, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a deletion discussion, as indicated on the template page itself, I would think a deletion would have to wait for the imperial era template to be created and rolled out. Ifly6 (talk) 20:14, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did make a start on an empire template, but realised we need a decision on what year we cut it off, and apologies have not continued on it. The previous template used the fall of the 5th-century Western Empire, which is an inappropriate reflection of current scholarship. That said, more important is that the Republic and Empire are differentiated, so I will request that, at minimum, Ifly6's work on those pages remain until more work is done for an empire template. I can work on the template if people here can help with a decision on the end date (it's either the 5th, 8th or 15th centuries). Biz (talk) 21:14, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn Deletion and Keep - Upon further thought it has some useful information. It is best kept. Reader of Information (talk) 15:50, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: If this template is kept, I'll be removing the deprecation tag. It can't be both ways. Gonnym (talk) 20:06, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend we keep the existing template for pages that use it (ie, Empire content) and the new Republic template can gradually replace pages that relate to that period. In effect, we will now have three templates and over time, the new empire template will come into being, replacing the Ancient Rome template. Biz (talk) 04:13, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Demotivator

[edit]

No transclusions. Created in March 2025. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:42, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep transcluded jp×g🗯️ 19:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep nomination rationale no longer the case, plus this is totally harmless. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:01, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and move to userspace if they want. These kind of fluff templates are actually harmful as they don't confirm to accessibility guidelines. The colors there can (and will) easily fail contrast for almost zero benefit. Gonnym (talk) 20:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: I do not even remotely understand this claim. What in the world contrast standard could conceivably claim that pure white on pure black is an accessibility failure? jp×g🗯️ 03:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I checked all the colors. All of the ones this template generates by default -- #FFFFFF #AAFFFF #FFAAFF #FFFFAA #CCCCFF #FFCCCC #CCFFCC -- have extremely high passing scores on every standard I could find. What are you referring to? jp×g🗯️ 03:23, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 6

Template:English legislation

[edit]

Template:England laws was sent to TfD here as they were pretty much the same scope. While looking at the pages linked from those templates, I noticed that the above 3 are all pretty much included in Template:UK legislation. We don't need 5 navigation templates for the same scope if Template:UK legislation already has all of the links. Gonnym (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - these have different scopes. Template:UK acts of Parliament lists is purely acts of Parliament from the UK, whereas Template:UK legislation covers all legislation from the UK and its predecessor states, and hence is a much heftier template. The same applies to the templates for English and British legislation - it is unhelpful to claim that one 'mega' template is better than more focussed ones. Mauls (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2025 (UTC)][reply]
The 'meta' template exists and is in use (and I did not create it). Since it exists, it isn't useful for our readers that we have navigation templates that don't follow WP:BIDIRECTIONAL. And it's a complete burden for our editors to have to maintain 4+ copies of the same list. Ah, I just noticed it was you that created 3 of these templates. Can you point me to a prior discussion which lead to the split? Any TfD? Gonnym (talk) 16:25, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: what exactly is the proposal here: deletion or merge...? Vestrian24Bio 11:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A few points: I didn't create three of these, I created two of them; they do all follow WP:BIDIRECTIONAL (the meta template and 'English legislation' as collapsed horizonal at the bottom of each of their listed articles, the two other vertical templates at the top, uncollapsed in each of their listed articles - per WP:SIDEBAR). There is no need to maintain four of the same list, as it's three lists (England/Great Britain/UK), and one template combining three. See the bit in WP:NAVBOX about sidebars with a smaller, more tightly defined set of articles, and less-tightly defined lists being in a footer template - as is the case here. How is the change you are proposing in line with WP:NAVBOX? How will it benefit the reader? (I also have to confess that I'm a bit unclear what you feel the 'burden' is in maintaining a list of laws passed in years before 1707 and before 1801 respectively? As far as I was aware, there aren't any more years being added to past centuries?) Mauls (talk) 11:57, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It is very misleading to name pages and categories here after the United Kingdom when they are defined as stretching back centuries before it existed - it treats the community as simple-minded, which it isn't at all. No harm in re-naming, if a better name can be found which avoids that trap. Moonraker (talk) 13:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 23:56, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 20

Rugby union squad navigation templates

[edit]

Rarely used and updated templates for teams that all feature in competitions previously deemed non-notable or get little coverage, or no don't compete in the top tier of their domestic competition. I don't see how they bring any help to a reader in terms of navigation anymore. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 08:38, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: the templates for clubs competing in the Pro D2 and Japan Rugby League One competitions (Divisions 1 and 2). I have no opinion about the others. It's fundamentally untrue that the Pro D2 and Japan Rugby League One (JRLO) are non-notable competitions. There's more than enough coverage of them if you look at more languages than just English. This type of template is only used in player biographies. If the templates of – for example – JRLO clubs are not used frequently, it's because many Japanese players don't have biographies in the English version of Wikipedia, but that is IMO no reason to delete the templates. They'll still be used in the biographies of (non-Japanese) players with a biography. There seem to be editors keeping squad lists of (some of) the clubs up-to-date. Why not ask those editors to also keep the templates up-to-date as well? They may not even be aware of the templates' existence and will possibly be happy to do it. I'm happy to keep a few of them up-to-date (I have done so in the past), but won't commit to doing all of them. Ruggalicious (talk) 12:25, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No point in having a navbox if it's filled with non-existent pages. Vestrian24Bio 12:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    My only issue with Pro D2 and JRLO Div 2 teams is that only some of them include enough links to players with articles to make them worthwile to keep. If it was all of the teams then I wouldn't have included them. Part of the problem though is they haven't been updated in a number of seasons and so most of the links are no longer accurate and irrelevant. If there is consensus to keep these ones I'll remove. As a note there are no JRLO Division 1 templates here, only Division 2 and 3 (I guess there is no issue with Div 3 as there are barely more than 1 to 5 links max in these ones, again usually out of date) Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:54, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 21:04, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Any views on whether a closure is likely on this. Personally I don't see objection to deletion of the majority of templates here (only one vote against 20 of the templates here, other 30 have no keep votes at all) but if it is likely going to be no consensus, I'm happy to relist in smaller groups. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:55, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. There isn't enough to keep any template. But even the one keep vote does not still address the major issue with these templates. 2 votes to delete all. This should be enough to close as delete. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have no objection to Pro D2 or JRLO Div 2 templates being recreated if they can be shown to include more than 6+ links to articles on English Wikipedia, and are then regularly updated and transcluded to articles properly. At the moment though too many red links and out dated squad lists being included and I don't see an appetite to update these templates (especially compared to Top14 or JRLO Div 1 templates where there are more links and active editors patrolling/updating them). Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 15

Template:CompUnits

[edit]

No transclusions. No incoming links to explain why it was created. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 26

Template:Teen Titans and Teen Titans Go!

[edit]

Redundant to Template:Teen Titans --woodensuperman 14:19, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, this doesn't seem to be redundant AHI-3000 (talk) 06:40, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is, all valid links are included in the wider navbox. --woodensuperman 13:04, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:43, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the larger template were nominated, I'd be advocating for a delete or a stripping. It's far too large at this point. Alas... I don't really get this template, and that's why I think I'll comment in favor of delete. It's not serving some overarching purpose but instead appears to be an entire duplicate of the other. There might be a valid template regarding solely the Go! brand, but this ain't it. Izno (talk) 23:38, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It is been over a month and both keep votes don't address the issue of trimming down the template and both (mine included) address the issue and lack of links if the template was stripped or trimmed down. A no consensus may be the outcome but all links in this template are already on the main Teen Titans template thus making this redundant minus the keep vote that doesn't address how it isn't. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:05, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Completed discussions

[edit]

A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at the "Holding Cell".

For an index of all old and archived discussions, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion&oldid=1273714158"