Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 December 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< December 25 December 27 >

December 26[edit]

Template:Free and paid online education[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 2021 January 4. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 00:41, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:American Chess Masters[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:10, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Too many problems to keep. The US had 108 chess grandmasters as of 2018, and that list will omit earlier players; it's not reasonable to include all of them in one navbox. Frank Marshall (chess player) and Irina Krush are among those not listed; the selection seems to be mostly including those with last names earlier alphabetically. Has been discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chess multiple times, with the sense that it is bad and could be deleted. Best to just have Category:American chess players. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:01, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Piranha249 19:52, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: What's the criteria used to add folks to this template? Subjective opinion? FIDE grandmaster status? –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Sex-related support groups[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:17, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Transcluded in only 1 article, Sexual addiction. Format, though not content, fails WP:NOTDIR and WP:NOTGUIDE. There is also Template:The three biggest S-fellowships, used only in the aforementioned template and Ichud HaKehillos LeTohar HaMachane. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:40, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete No purpose in being separated from the actual article. Nigej (talk) 19:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and delete is not used elsewhere. Labelled section transclusion would be the more normal way to allow reuse. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 08:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Chennai Super Kings Roster[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:48, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary, no need. They should be substed and deleted. See similar discussion also. Empire AS Talk! 18:00, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete same reason as the Pakistani Super League templates listed below, and the Lanka Premier League templates linked in nom of that discussion. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:39, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. Unneeded. Empire AS Talk! 18:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Karachi Kings Roster[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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:51, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary, not needed. Used only once. They should be substed and deleted. See similar discussion too. Empire AS Talk! 17:41, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Range[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 moved to userspace. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Broken, rarely used template; unfinished since creation in 2007. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Userfi: Move it and all its subpages and talk pages to my user space, then delete the redirects. (But update the links from other talk pages that link to it.) See Wikipedia:Userfication. I made that template, but we never got around to deploy it since most people preferred to handle such lists in other ways. I like to keep my old templates in my user space for several reasons: To keep nice coding ideas I might reuse, and keep the discussions that led to them. The template is actually fully working, I just checked at the /testcases subpage. Since you wanted it "gone" I was just about to move it all to my user space, but I noticed it is used in four articles. All four cases are faulty usage so can be fixed and removed. But I don't have the time to investigate and fix all that right now. I'll try to fix it some other day. If I haven't, poke my user talk page again. --David Göthberg (talk) 15:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Infobox route 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 Nothing to merge, just replace "infobox route map" with "infobox rail line" or "infobox rail".

Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:22, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Infobox route map with Template:Infobox rail line.
Little-used template (approximately 250 transclusions) that is merely a subset of the standard infobox. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 15:59, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Replace. I don't really remember why I made this; I assume there was some reason why routemap couldn't just be included in infobox rail line at the time. If so, that's no longer the case. I don't think there's anything that needs to be merged. Mackensen (talk) 16:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

Template:Walt Disney Television[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 merge to Template:Disney. (non-admin closure) –Piranha249 16:50, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Walt Disney Television with Template:Disney.
Duplication; most links are already covered in other template. –Piranha249 19:02, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge per nom. As stated most links are already included in the General Entertainment grouping. The following are the missing items (and my personal take on what to do). I think only 4 links and a subgroup are missing:
    • ABC Daytime (sub of ABC) - merge it
    • ABC Family Worldwide (superset to Freeform) - merge it
    • DisneyNow (listed elsewhere under Other assets) - simply move it up. makes sense to be with TV
    • Disney+ Originals (Disney+ is listed under distribution > streaming ) - don't merge, per USA Today, the originals are handled by Disney Television Studios, which is already captured
    • FX on Hulu - don't merge, this is a redirect to something already linked
    • Nat Geo Mundo - don't merge (not an article)
    • Production (National Geographic Studios) - don't merge (not an article)
    • ABC Audio - merge
    • Lincoln Square Productions - don't merge: this is a redirect
    • Predecessor companies (none are included) - merge them, but replace NBC with Blue Network (the NBC Blue division that actually did go on to become ABC vice all of NBC)
      -2pou (talk) 19:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Piranha249 15:56, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_December_26&oldid=1073153359"