Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 March 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< March 24 March 26 >

March 25[edit]

Template:Uw-userspacenoindex[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2017 April 4. Primefac (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2017 (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:Null edit[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 01:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template with a broken tool link. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:45, 25 March 2017 (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:Cite doi/subpage[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 15:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite doi was retired, so this template probably should as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:44, 25 March 2017 (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:Miami Sting roster[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. To avoid losing what little information is there, I've substed the template onto the Miami Sting page. Template is REFUNDable provided that it can be shown that it will be used in more than one location. Primefac (talk) 01:55, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A template which is potentially useful only if kept current, but has not been updated since its creation in 2012. Most of the links are red, and the 2 bluelinks both link to articles which appear to be unconnected to the topic of indoor American football. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:37, 25 March 2017 (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:Vgm sample[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 01:56, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Created in 2006 per Talk:Video_game_music/Archive_1#Some_video_game_music_samples.3F. If it was needed, it would probably have been used by now. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:04, 25 March 2017 (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:Södertälje SK seasons[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 02:01, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless navbox which is just a sea of redlinks, with precisely zero navigable links. Even the title link is non-navigable. Created in 2008, so doesn't look like it is going anywhere. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:02, 25 March 2017 (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:Archive for converted wikitext talk page[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:01, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not appear to be in use anywhere anymore. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:30, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete. Seems it was overlooked in the last discussion; so delete per that discussion.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 17:04, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per nom. I omitted this template in my first listing because it seemed like it might have been used on some "/Flow archive" page, which apparently isn't true. Pppery 17:56, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete per consensus to delete Flow_templates. This one was missed at the time. Alsee (talk) 18:24, 26 March 2017 (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:Citation/core/testing[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:02, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template apparently is not used anymore. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:17, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete. I created it for testing many years ago. No longer needed. COGDEN 04:11, 26 March 2017 (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:Archive list/display25[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 02:17, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not appear to be in use anymore and has no transclusions. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:15, 25 March 2017 (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:Archive list/check25[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 02:17, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not appear to be in use anymore and has no transclusions. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:14, 25 March 2017 (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:Editintro/db-r3[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:05, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not appear to be in use in system messages anymore, or anywhere at all. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:13, 25 March 2017 (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:Main talk category other[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 02:17, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the use of this template never really took off, given that it has only a few transclusions that don't appear to be proper uses. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:46, 25 March 2017 (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:Pp-main-page[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2017 April 4. Primefac (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2017 (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:NotA-Class[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 02:21, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template does not appear to be in use anymore. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:29, 25 March 2017 (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:Historic Places in Canada[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:25, 25 March 2017 (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:WPBannerHeader[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 02:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like this template never really got into use. Pinging @MSGJ: given that it's on User talk:MSGJ/to do Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:51, 25 March 2017 (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:When on page[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:11, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like a {{Namespace and pagename-detecting templates}} that never really took off. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:49, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, we don't need it, and there so many other namespace/pagename detecting templates. Frietjes (talk) 15:26, 25 March 2017 (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:Task force categories[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not appear to be in use anymore. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:26, 25 March 2017 (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:User5-rfcu[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:13, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not appear to be in use anymore. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:23, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, we don't need it, and there are so many other userlink templates. Frietjes (talk) 15:27, 25 March 2017 (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:User5-norfcu[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:13, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not appear to be in use anymore. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:22, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, we don't need it, and there are so many other userlink templates. Frietjes (talk) 15:27, 25 March 2017 (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:Str index/logic[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:14, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not appear to be in use anymore anywhere. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:12, 25 March 2017 (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:Str index/getchar[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 02:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is this template still needed anywhere? It does not appear to be in use anymore. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:12, 25 March 2017 (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:UK ISPs' Transparent Proxies[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was move to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/2008 IWF action/UK ISPs' Transparent Proxies. Originally I was planning on just substing the info, but given that it has some history I'll leave it as a subpage. Primefac (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template was apparently never used, or isn't used anymore, on MediaWiki:Blockiptext. It is prolly obsolete and should be deleted or marked as historical and unprotected. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:08, 25 March 2017 (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:Protected title[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was mark as historical. Primefac (talk) 02:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This way of salting titles is obsolete. Does it merit deletion, tagging as historical and unprotection? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:52, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mark as historical and unprotect per nom. – Train2104 (t • c) 23:26, 2 April 2017 (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:Skin-file disambig[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. No opposition. Primefac (talk) 01:49, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This template does not appear to be used in system messages or MediaWiki:Common.js anymore. Is it still needed? It also needs to be delisted from WP:CASC if deleted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:27, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: This requires investigation - if I go to Special:MyPage/skin.js when not logged in, I see this template flash by for a fraction of a second before the regular "Wikipedia does not have a user page with this exact name" page loads. — Train2104 (t • c) 18:30, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Found the trouble spot - need to remove the skin.js and skin.css lines from {{No article text}}. common.js sends the user immediately to the proper skin file name anyway. See sandbox. — Train2104 (t • c) 18:41, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per request of Train2104 I have removed the transclusion of this template in {{No article text}}, and also removed it from WP:CASC — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:21, 27 March 2017 (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:Precision/a[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was Delete uncontroversial clean up of redundant subtemplates. Jimp 20:39, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is this template still in use anywhere? Because if no it should probably be deleted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:23, 25 March 2017 (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:BSkm[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 01:48, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and deprecated template; all uses have been replaced with {{BSsplit}}. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 05:48, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Long overdue. Useddenim (talk) 14:15, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I count 19 transclusions of which 18 are in article space, so the claim that it's unused is questionable at best. If this is deleted these will all have to be replaced by whatever the successor is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.1.145.8 (talk) 09:57, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there are many places where BSkm is still in use and the the diagrams are displaying badly because of the deletion notice such as Rhine Railway (Baden).--Grahame (talk) 12:55, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Deletion notice noincluded — Train2104 (t • c) 15:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Train2104 and Grahamec: My bad, I assumed AnomieBOT had substituted all of the uses. I've replaced the remainder of the transclusions with {{BSsplit}} (no change in display). Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 16:20, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.--Grahame (talk) 03:04, 28 March 2017 (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:Deprod-afd[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was merge to Template:Deprod. If it turns out that merging to {{Deprod-m}} is easier/less hassle, feel free to do so. Primefac (talk) 01:57, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging all into {{Deprod}}. Having separate templates for each reason for deprodding seems excessive to me. Either merge with a parameter switch, or just use {{deprod-m}} that takes a custom explanation. I deliberately did not nominate {{deprod-reprod}}, as that is more of a policy reminder. — Train2104 (t • c) 01:47, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support Seems fair. Maybe {{deprod-m}} can be adjusted to fit the standard WP:WARNING style. TheDragonFire (talk) 02:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge per Train2104. It seems very reasonable to do so, and by using parameters we can very easily merge them. ToThAc (talk) 23:12, 4 April 2017 (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:PRODNote[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. No opposition. Primefac (talk) 01:54, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both as redundant with {{Proposed deletion notify}}. — Train2104 (t • c) 01:45, 25 March 2017 (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/2017_March_25&oldid=773895585"