Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< February 1 February 3 >

February 2[edit]

Template:CSUGenSecs[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and already covered by Template:Christian Social Union in Bavaria. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Recently replaced by the newer template so no need for both. Gonnym (talk) 06:09, 3 February 2022 (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 Needed[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary for multiple reasons. If someone wants to add an infobox to an article whose topic almost certainly merits one, adding a basic infobox is quite easy. There is also no guideline that states most articles should have infoboxes, and the creator of this template seems to not understand that (this artctle needs a infobox like every other artcile about living personss, explaining their use here). Elli (talk | contribs) 23:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Its existence implies that any or all articles should include an infobox, an instruction to dissect facts into 'machine-readable' data. Blech! ~ cygnis insignis 13:55, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The reason i put it on there because it makes the article MORE easier to see like the rey mysterio articile and no i am not saying every article needs one. TzarN64 (talk) 14:40, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete We've had {{Infobox requested}} for many years and {{Infobox needed}} redirected to that. Now someone's created {{Infobox Needed}} (capital N) which looks nearly identical to {{Infobox requested}} and redirected {{Infobox needed}} there instead. Am I missing something or this all just crazy? Nigej (talk) 16:00, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unnecessary and likely to be divisive, seeing as how entrenched supporters and opponents of infoboxes can be. We have {{Infobox requested}} for talk pages, which is the correct place, not the article itself.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Detransclude" and redirect this has been a talk page request, so should not appear on the subjectpage. It could function as a redirect to the older pre-existing request template though, since someone believed it should be spelled in this manner. I say "detransclude" as a procedural matter, though this isn't being used at the time of my opinion. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2022 (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:Country data Aracaju[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:39, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neither used or are countries. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. They could reasonably be used, and country data templates are not only for countries. See {{Country data Boston}} and many others. Also, {{Country data Limburg}} is a disambiguation page, not a template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:52, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, the first three have been sitting around for almost seven years. The last one for almost a decade. If they were useful, they'd be used. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:58, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per 'useful, they'd be used', with no objection to future recreation at 'use' time. --Izno (talk) 18:40, 9 February 2022 (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:Map - Von der Leyen Commission members by gender[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused map relating to the von der Leyen Commission. Nigej (talk) 20:17, 2 February 2022 (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:Map - Party affiliations in the Von der Leyen Commission members[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused map relating to the von der Leyen Commission. Nigej (talk) 20:14, 2 February 2022 (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:Map of Irish Treaty Ports[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Map of Treaty Ports (Ireland). Seems unfinished as it contains places unconnected to Ireland. Treaty Ports (Ireland) uses a different map. Nigej (talk) 20:04, 2 February 2022 (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:Latest preview software release/Yandex Browser[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. The relevant article has been modified to use Wikidata, which is the trend with these templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:50, 2 February 2022 (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:Latest stable software release/Yahoo! Music Jukebox[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. The relevant article maintains this information within the article. The trend with these templates is either conversion to wikidata or in-article information. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:48, 2 February 2022 (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:ROC (Taiwan) Army[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Unused, poorly formatted template; {{Military of the Republic of China}} is more comprehensive and is in use. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:44, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Maybe intended as some sort of sidebar. Won't be any use now. Nigej (talk) 20:25, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but it needs a better edits to it. TzarN64 (talk) 15:23, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see how a sidebar would even fit in the layout of articles like Ministry of National Defense (Republic of China), Republic of China Military Academy and National Revolutionary Army. These are full of infoboxes (multiple, with one having 3 different ones) and images. Also some of the infoboxes are even violating MOS:DONTHIDE. The side layout on these pages is already over-packed, adding another big template won't help anyone. Gonnym (talk) 19:38, 3 February 2022 (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:Shipping industry statistics[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, incoming links, documentation, or categories. Created in 2007, after which there have been 17 edits by 12 different editors to fix little problems with the template. This is a classic example of the maintenance burden of unused template pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:34, 2 February 2022 (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:Latest preview software release/WinRAR[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. This template has been replaced by a wikidata call at the relevant article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:20, 2 February 2022 (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:CSUHeads[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. The more comprehensive {{Christian Social Union in Bavaria}} is used instead. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Recently replaced by the newer template so no need for both. Gonnym (talk) 06:09, 3 February 2022 (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:SongsInCentury[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 20:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links. Appears to have been replaced by {{YYYY songs category header}} on category pages like Category:1972 songs. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Amazingly it's identical to the day it was written 15 years ago. Perhaps never used but clearly no longer of any use. Nigej (talk) 19:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This was actually used on pages like Category:20th-century songs (century level, not year level) but was replaced with {{Navseasoncats}}. I find the layout of the works in century template to be unnecessary. Gonnym (talk) 06:16, 3 February 2022 (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:Missilespecs-imp[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:38, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These two templates, which have no transclusions or documentation, appear to be unused. I did a search for some of the phrases in them and turned up nothing. The creator of these templates also created the very similar non-substitution template {{Rocket specs}}, which is used in a few places. I checked a bunch of articles about missiles, and they did not have sections with this sort of information. If they need it, {{Rocket specs}} should do the job, or it could be modified to do the job. Note: In a 2011 TFD for one of them, it was claimed that the template was still being used but was being phased out. There were no links to substitution targets provided, but it appears that if they existed, this format is no longer present in articles. I welcome searches that contradict my assertions here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment "missilespecs" seems badly built or badly named, it doesn't account for several different types of missiles that don't use rocket engines. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:16, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the "rocket specifications" seems badly built, since it is using HTML header tags -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:22, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Additionally, this one is clearly based on Template:Aircraft specs, which itself is a mess and a half that probably should not exist. --Izno (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2022 (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:European Council standings[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 19:06, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, incoming links (except from one editor's user pages), documentation, or categories. Appears to duplicate single-article content that is maintained in the article at European Council (not to be confused with Council of the European Union, which is where this template links). – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:59, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Either it needs to be copied to European Council, replacing the graphs there, and then be deleted OR it simply needs to be deleted. Retaining it in template space is not a sensible option. Slightly confusing that the two differ but that's not the issue here. Nigej (talk) 19:17, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2022 (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).

Japanese Regional League maps 2009 and 2010[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 19:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hadn't realised how many of these there were. See #Template:Hokkaido League map 2009 below. All unused and all relate to 2009 Japanese Regional Leagues and 2010 Japanese Regional Leagues which use their own style of map. Difficult to imagine there's any prospect of any of them ever being used. Nigej (talk) 18:54, 2 February 2022 (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:SYR Blackburn Valley Line[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2022 February 9. Izno (talk) 19:09, 9 February 2022 (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:Red Rock Corridor[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused; concept has since morphed into a BRT proposal. Mackensen (talk) 18:37, 2 February 2022 (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:Tyneside Electric[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and possibly unfinished; the parent article Tyneside Electrics already has a routemap. Mackensen (talk) 18:34, 2 February 2022 (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:Tamar Valley Line RDT[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 19:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused; superseded by {{Tamar Valley Line}}. See related discussion at Talk:Tamar Valley Line#Route diagram. Mackensen (talk) 18:31, 2 February 2022 (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:Miss Cambodia[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 19:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing like enough content to make a navbox worthwhile. Nigej (talk) 17:40, 2 February 2022 (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:Beauty pageants in Cambodia[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 19:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just two links but even those link to the same article Cambodian beauty pageants. Nigej (talk) 17:34, 2 February 2022 (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:Miss Grand International countries and territories[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 18:53, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A list of "Miss Country" that have competed in Miss Grand International. The list is not mentioned in the parent article. Surely there's no encyclopedic value in such a template. Nigej (talk) 17:02, 2 February 2022 (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:Miss Grand Thailand participant province[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 18:53, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Completely fails the basic requirement of a WP:NAVBOX that "All articles within a template relate to a single, coherent subject." We have a beauty contest and a list of provinces. Clearly not a "single, coherent subject", just a list of provinces. The reality is that there's just the one article Miss Grand Thailand. No need for a navbox. Nigej (talk) 16:45, 2 February 2022 (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:Miss Grand Thailand[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 18:52, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The two blue links actually go the same article. Otherwise all red. Created recently but we need a significant number of articles first. Nigej (talk) 16:33, 2 February 2022 (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:Hokkaido League map 2009[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 18:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused maps relating to the teams in the Hokkaido Soccer League. See 2009 Japanese Regional Leagues#Hokkaido and 2010 Japanese Regional Leagues#Hokkaido which have their own maps. No other content so nowhere else for these to go. Nigej (talk) 16:11, 2 February 2022 (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:Image FRC events detail 2011[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 18:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

3 unused imagemaps seemingly related to the FIRST Robotics Competition in 2011, called Logo Motion. At one time there was an article 2011 FIRST Robotics Competition season which had detailed information on the "season". I suspect that these were in that article at one time, or intended for it. 2011 FIRST Robotics Competition season was WP:BLARed to the parent article in 2016. Nigej (talk) 15:38, 2 February 2022 (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:Imagemap Luconia Shoals[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. No prejudice against userfication if requested, as there were some suggestions in the discussion about how to potentially make this a usable template in the future. Primefac (talk) 12:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfinished imagemap of Luconia Shoals, which has the same image already. Says "work in progress, please leave it" but it's been untouched for well over 3 years. Nigej (talk) 15:19, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I had forgotten it and lost it out of sight. Now it is finished, to be included in the article Luconia Shoals. Thank you.--Ratzer (talk) 10:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are 5 images in that article. What does this add that the other 5 don't cover already? If it overlaps with one of them, then it should replace it (and then it should be subst there directly). Gonnym (talk) 21:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • nice map, but no geographical names
    nice map, but no geographical names
  • low quality map, but with geographical names
    low quality map, but with geographical names
There are two maps in the article, not counting the locator map. The first map is an exact map based on satellite imagery, but without geographical names. The second map is bad quality, but has the geographical names. This imagemap can replace both of them. If I only could figure out how to place it in the same position within the article, along the right margin.--Ratzer (talk) 08:23, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Objection. You are ignoring my last contribution. The unifies the advantages of two other maps it will replace, and does not have their disadvantages.--Ratzer (talk) 15:23, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and delete. --Izno (talk) 18:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Make better before used: since the names aren't linked and I don't foresee any articles for them coming soon, there is no value in using {{Image label}}. Instead this should probably be converted to a proper image with the labels on them so that way when someone clicks the map to enlarge it, the labels don't disappear (as they do now). Then the template can replace one or both of the other maps. Gonnym (talk) 11:09, 13 February 2022 (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:Most populated cities of Uttar Pradesh[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused list of the 16 largest cities. Article content so needs substituting somewhere (if somewhere can be found) and then deleting. Could be in Uttar Pradesh#Divisions, districts and cities but that uses a different list. Nigej (talk) 14:11, 2 February 2022 (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:Motorcycle trials seasons[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and out-of-date duplicate of {{Motorcycle trials competition}}. Nigej (talk) 13:53, 2 February 2022 (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:Southampton Lines[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 12:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Mackensen (talk) 12:35, 2 February 2022 (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:Eurostar WI[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 12:58, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Mackensen (talk) 12:22, 2 February 2022 (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:MRT Grey Line route[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused; potential parent article (Grey Line (Bangkok)) has been renamed and the station lists don't match. Mackensen (talk) 11:43, 2 February 2022 (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).

MetroLink (St. Louis) expansion route diagrams[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused route diagram templates for MetroLink (St. Louis); these projects were all proposed a decade or more ago and have not progressed. Mackensen (talk) 11:38, 2 February 2022 (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:Symbols of Ontario[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 12:34, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two closely related unused navboxes. We have articles on Symbols of Ontario and Symbols of Quebec and a navbox is used in these to provide links to the other province/territories. However there's really only one article on each state, so the two navboxes contain links to the flag and coat of arms, but otherwise just links to various animals and plants. Nothing like enough articles on the actual topics. Nigej (talk) 10:17, 2 February 2022 (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:Syrian Constitution[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sidebar on the "Syrian Constitution of 13 March 1973". Even Syrian Constitution of 1973 doesn't use. The reason is that there's only 1 article, not a "series", see Category:1973 Constitution of Syria. The 4 chapter links are all redirects to the parent article. Clearly there was a plan for more articles but there haven't been any substantive edits to the template for over a decade. Nigej (talk) 10:02, 2 February 2022 (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:SyrianDefenseMinisters[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfinished, abandoned, unused and unnecessary since we already had a {{SyriaDefenseMins}} when this one was created. Nigej (talk) 09:53, 2 February 2022 (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:Syriac alphabet shapes[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Seems to have been replaced by a series of images like File:Syriac letter shapes Waw.PNG. Nigej (talk) 09:39, 2 February 2022 (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:Otago cricket team squad[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket squad, unused and not updated since 2016. Either needs to be updated, used and maintained, or deleted. Nigej (talk) 09:12, 2 February 2022 (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).

Masters athletics record templates 2[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a follow-up to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 January 28#Masters athletics record templates. These 10 are also unused, presumably for the same reason noted in the first discussion, their records have been broken. No plausible use in the future. Nigej (talk) 09:02, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. Probably should be substituted on relevant pages. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2022 (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:IVL, VL and Valmet aircraft[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated template. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 08:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate of Template:Valtion lentokonetehdas aircraft, discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft#Duplicate navboxes, request deletion. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 08:54, 2 February 2022 (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:The rising tied track listing[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:52, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extra track listing template providing minimal navigational benefit. Better fulfilled by the {{Fort Minor}} navbox. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 07:36, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment If this is a generic issue, it might be better to have some sort of mass nomination. Seems we have 153 in this category. Nigej (talk) 07:39, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure if it's an all or nothing thing. It's typically been for track listings with only a few songs that have articles or where navigation is fulfilled by a duplicative album navigational box. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 07:57, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK. I know that mass deletion can be problematic unless there is a really specific generic argument. Nigej (talk) 08:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2022 (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:Until the Whole World Hears track listing[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:54, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only 4 tracks have articles. Navigation amongst the transcluded articles is already provided by Template:Casting Crowns. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 07:26, 2 February 2022 (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:Current Top 20 PSA Men's Rankings[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:54, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Squash rankings related. Now unused. These two have not been updated since 2020 and I have switched their usage to {{Current Top 10 PSA Men's Rankings}} and {{Current Top 10 PSA Women's Rankings}} instead, which are better maintained. Nigej (talk) 07:21, 2 February 2022 (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:The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars tracks[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:58, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Provides redundant navigation to Template:Ziggy Stardust. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 07:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Struggling to remember why I created it. Best guess is that it was a messy table or something at the bottom of the article, that I spotted while doing a mass clean up of music infoboxes. Bin it with a snowball as far as I'm concerned. - X201 (talk) 08:25, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • G7 delete per the template's creator. Redundant to the more complete {{Ziggy Stardust}} navbox. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:07, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2022 (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:Current PSA Men's Champions[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:58, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Three single-use article content templates, squash related. Now unused, as I have copied the content to the appropriate article. Nigej (talk) 07:09, 2 February 2022 (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:Squash2011PAG[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:59, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Squash multi-sport event related. Single-use article content. Now unused, as I have copied the content to the appropriate article. Nigej (talk) 06:43, 2 February 2022 (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:Science Nobel prizes in 2018[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 11:59, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Group of 4 related navboxes. The first two are unused, the other 2 were being used as single-use article-content at 2020 in science#Awards and 2020 in science#Awards. I have extracted the content and added to the article, so these 2 are also now unused. Inappropriate use of a WP:NAVBOX which are "a grouping of links used in multiple related articles" so can't be used for a single article. Also shouldn't be used to contain actual article content, only links for navigation. Nigej (talk) 06:33, 2 February 2022 (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:Thriller tracks[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 12:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember when but several of these sidebars were discussed and deleted as they were deemed redundant (in this case the redundancy is at Template:Thriller (album)). (CC) Tbhotch™ 06:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Personally I see these as duplication. Where we have a navbox I don't see the need for them (they are added to the infobox - generally hidden). Nigej (talk) 06:37, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. A valid navbox used in the same articles provides adequate navigation. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 07:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2022 (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:YYYY crime films category header[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 12:06, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replace with Template:YYYY genre films category header. Gonnym (talk) 06:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete replacing usages with the new generic version. Nigej (talk) 06:10, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2022 (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:Self-harm[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2022 February 11. Primefac (talk) 10:46, 11 February 2022 (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:SLC Intermodal Hub[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:28, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused; was removed from Salt Lake City Intermodal Hub in 2019 and not re-added. Mackensen (talk) 03:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As the original creator, I am fine with it being deleted. --AdmrBoltz 23:35, 3 February 2022 (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:Current Vale of Neath Railway[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:22, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused; could be used on Vale of Neath Railway but was removed in 2017 and not re-added. Mackensen (talk) 03:22, 2 February 2022 (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:Swansea and Neath Railway diagram[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:19, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused; apparently superseded by {{Vale of Neath Railway RDT}}. Mackensen (talk) 03:19, 2 February 2022 (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:Israel populations 2013[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:05, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, documentation, or categories. This appears to be a template that was used at one time but has been superseded. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:19, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The idea behind this template was to store the population data from each year so as to be able to create demographic trend tables. @Ynhockey: I think you might have been the person that suggested doing this – what are your thoughts. Cheers, Number 57 17:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if I suggested it, but I'd like it kept actually. —Ynhockey (Talk) 09:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – it's a data template with a consistent name and format to other data templates in the series, therefore I believe it should be kept so it's easy to go back if we ever need easy access to populations for 2013. A possible use case is in 2023 (or 2024, when 2023 data becomes available), when we might want to show a 10-year difference. —Ynhockey (Talk) 09:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. A list of populations from 2013 that's not being used. Might be used in 2023 but might not. Best deleted until someone finds a use for it. Probably when someone does find a use for it they'll need it in a different form anyway. Nigej (talk) 14:09, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 03:13, 2 February 2022 (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:Ceres Quads - By Name[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was keep. ✗plicit 03:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just a Topographic map of Ceres with no transclusions anywhere nor any links to articles on Wikipedia. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:39, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • KEEP - As OA of the template, the template may help provide a certain amount of perspective and orientation re the "dwarf planet Ceres", and may be useful in related articles I would think - nonetheless - I'm flexible with this, and would support whatever the "WP:CONSENSUS" view is decided of course - hope this helps in some way - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 23:00, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment someone should write an article on the quads of Ceres, and other geographic breakdowns of Ceres, like geography of Ceres or somesuch -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:17, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • NEW TEMPLATE UPDATES - Updated the template with official Quadrangle Names, and with Wiki-Links to relevant Wiki-Articles - this should make the template more useful, and much more "Keep-Worthy" I would think - there are now 4 transclusions re the {{Ceres Quads - By Name}} template - template is consistent with other reported Ceres Quadrangle maps[1] that are not currently available for use on Wikipedia - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy - Drbogdan (talk) 01:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Brown, Andrew R.; Byrd, Deborah (24 March 2015). "Dwarf planet Ceres gets place names". Earth & Sky. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  • Delete as unused. As usual, I oppose adding templates to articles as a result of them being listed at TfD; if they were truly useful their absence would have been discovered some other way. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • That doesn't make sense. It would just lead to people making multiple duplicate/overlapping templates. Instead of using an existing one. As product creators state, you don't know what you're missing if you don't know what you're missing. Hence why the IBM CEO once stated that there was a worldwide market of a handful of computers maximum, or why people said no one would want an iPhone. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:14, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it could be added to List of geological features on Ceres and Ceres (dwarf planet)#Maps, since maps with the quads breakdown should be in those articles -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:14, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 03:10, 2 February 2022 (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:Artaani Labelled Map[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:23, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused map. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now it is used on Artaani (historical region), please do not delete Ercwlff (talk) 23:57, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 03:10, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. This is currently single-article content, but maps like this can overwhelm the wikitext with code, so it is sometimes useful to have them as separate template pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:02, 2 February 2022 (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:2022 NCAA Division I FCS independents football standings[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With James Madison joining the Sun Belt, there will be no FCS independents in 2022, rendering this template unnecessary. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 00:36, 2 February 2022 (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.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022_February_2&oldid=1072385914"