Misplaced Pages

:Templates for discussion: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:51, 28 January 2005 editVacuum (talk | contribs)1,303 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 16:32, 17 December 2024 edit undoGonnym (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Template editors224,977 edits →What not to propose for discussion here: mention WP:T5 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Page for discussing mergers and deletions of templates}}
{{Shortcut|]}}
{{Redirect|WP:TFD|the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions|Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion}}
{{deletiontools}}
{{About|discussion of templates|a list of templates used for discussion|Misplaced Pages:List of discussion templates}}
Sometimes, we want to delete things in the ]. This is particularly used for article series boxes that are either not noteworthy, are redundant with categories, or which have simply been orphaned. For guidelines on what constitutes an acceptable article series box, see ]. If you vote to keep a series box, be prepared to explain how it fulfills the criteria set up at this page,
{{pp-move-indef}}
{{#ifexpr:{{#invoke:XfD old|total|title=Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion}}>10|{{Admin backlog|bot=AnomieBOT}}}}
{{offer help}}
{{floating link|Closing instructions}}
<div class="tfd-header">
{{Ombox
| style = text-align: center
| type = notice
| image = none
| text = {{hlist|'']''|'']''|''{{Purge|Purge this page}}''}}<inputbox>
type=fulltext
prefix=Misplaced Pages:Templates for d
break=no
width=50
placeholder=Enter &#x5b;&#x5b;Template:Example&#x5d;&#x5d; to find a discussion
searchbuttonlabel=Search archives
</inputbox>
| imageright = {{Shortcut|WP:TFD}}
}}
{{XFD backlog|right}}
{{Deletion debates}}


On this page, the deletion or merging of ''']''' and ''']''', except as noted ], is discussed.
Templates listed on this page do not need to be orphans prior to listing, and in fact should not be removed from pages prior to listing. However, templates should be removed from all pages prior to deletion. Currently, this can only be done manually.
{{TOC limit|3}}


==How to use this page==
Note that, in addition to voting "Keep" or "Delete," a valid vote on this page is "Convert to category." In this case, all pages with the template should be added to an appropriately named category, and the template should be deleted.
===<span id="NOT"></span> What ''not'' to propose for discussion here===
{{shortcut|WP:TFD#NOT}}
The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the ] and ] should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:


; Stub templates
To list a template on this page, add it to the list below under the appropriate date. Link to it as <nowiki>]</nowiki> instead of as <nowiki>{{Insert template here}}</nowiki>. When listing a template on this page, add <nowiki>{{tfd|NAME OF TEMPLATE}}</nowiki> to the '''top of the template itself'''. This will add the following text to the template:
: Stub templates and categories should be listed at ], as these templates are merely containers for their categories, ''unless'' the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
; Userboxes
: Userboxes should be listed at ], regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
; Speedy deletion candidates
: If the template clearly satisfies a ], tag it with a ]. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{t|Db-author}}. See also ].
; Policy or guideline templates
: Templates that are associated with particular ], such as the ], cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant guideline.
; Template redirects
: List at ].
; Moving and renaming
: Use ].


===<span class="anchor" id="REASONS"></span> Reasons to delete a template===
{{tfd}}
{{shortcut|WP:TFD#REASONS}}
# The template violates some part of the ], and can't be altered to be in compliance.
# The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
# The template is not used, either directly or by ] (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), {{Strong|and has no likelihood of {{em|being}} used}}.
# The template violates a policy such as ] or ] and it can't be fixed through normal editing.


Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, ] may be able to help.
When adding this message to templates that are in the form of series boxes, the message should be placed inside the box, to make it clear what is being proposed for deletion. When being added to templates which have already been blanked, and are just sitting around as blanks, the message should be added to the template talk page. Again, do not blank templates to list them here - this is just if the template is already blank when you are listing it.


Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by ] here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.
'''Articles that have been listed for more than one week''' are eligible for deletion if either a consensus to do so has been reached or no objects to its deletion have been raised. Such templates should be dealt with as soon as possible. Archived discussions are located at ].


===Listing a template===
Votes for deletion (VfD) subpages: ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ]
{{shortcut|WP:TFDHOWTO|WP:TFDHOW}}
{{Strong|To list a template for deletion or merging, adhere to the following three-step process.}} Utilizing ] is strongly recommended as it automates and simplifies these steps. To use Twinkle, click TW ] in the toolbar (top right of the page), then select XFD. Do {{em|not}} include the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps, unless specifically instructed otherwise.
{| class="wikitable" style="clear: both;"
|-
! scope="col" | Step
! scope="col" | Instructions
|- id="Step I"
! scope="row" style="background-color: #ffff99;" | I: Tag the template.
| style="padding: 0.5em;" | Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:


* For deletion: {{Tlxs|Tfd}}
''']''' -- ]
* For deletion of a sidebar or infobox template: {{Tlxs|Tfd|2=type=sidebar}}
* For deletion of an inline template: {{Tlxs|Tfd|2=type=inline}}
* For deletion of a ]: {{Tlxs|Tfd|2=type=module|3=page={{var|{{Gray|name of module}}}}}} at the top of the module's <code>/doc</code> subpage.
* For merging: {{Tlxs|Tfm|{{var|{{Gray|name of other template}}}}}}
* For merging an inline template: {{Tlxs|Tfm|2=type=inline|3={{var|{{Gray|name of other template to be merged}}}}}}
**Other values for {{para|type}} are available, see ]


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


'''Multiple templates:''' If you are nominating multiple related templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "]"). Tag every template with {{Tlxs|Tfd|2=heading={{var|{{Gray|discussion title}}}}}} or {{Tlxs|Tfm|{{var|{{Gray|name of other template}}}}|3=heading={{var|{{Gray|discussion title}}}}}} instead of the versions given above, replacing <code>{{var|discussion title}}</code> with the title you chose (but still not changing the <code>PAGENAME</code> code).
Please put new listings under ] at the bottom of the page.


'''Related categories:''' If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, add {{Tlx|Catfd|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}}} to the top of any categories that would be deleted as a result of the TfD, this time replacing <code>{{var|template name}}</code> with the name of the template being nominated. (If you instead chose a meaningful title for a multiple nomination, use {{Tlx|Catfd|2=header={{var|{{Gray|title of nomination}}}}}} instead.)
===January 17===
==== ] ====
I played around with this last year, but never got it working properly and has been superceded anyway. ] ] 03:14, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* ''']?''' Mackensen was the only one that had edited it and it's unused. -- ] ] 22:09, 2005 Jan 25 (UTC)
*'''Speedy delete'''.
:"10. Any article which is requested for deletion by the original author, provided the author reasonably explains that it was created by mistake, and the article was edited only by its author." &mdash; ] ] 11:36, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
*
*


'''TemplateStyles pages:''' The above templates will not work on ] pages. Instead, add a CSS comment to the top of the page:
===January 18===
:<code>/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Misplaced Pages's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: <nowiki>https://</nowiki>en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/{{CURRENTYEAR}}_{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}_{{CURRENTDAY}}#Template:{{var|{{Gray|template_name}}}}.css */</code>
==== ] ====


|- id="Step II"
This is an ], which asserts that you must use the image if you are moral, but can't use if it you're not. The GFDL doesn't differentiate between who is moral enough to use our material, and there is potential for legal problems here too. ]|] 16:17, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
! scope="row" style="background-color: #ffcc00;" | II: List the template at TfD.
:... the image, and everything else in the world. I hereby declare that I will never subject Misplaced Pages (or any later user of my images) to any legal challenge regarding the use of my work, whether I personally consider the use of it to be ethical or not. ] 17:33, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
| style="padding: 0.5em;" | {{Clickable button|Edit today's TfD log|url={{fullurl:Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/{{CURRENTYEAR}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}|action=edit&section=1}}|class=mw-ui-progressive}} and paste this text '''to the top of the list''':
::Unambiguous like Fair Use? The declaration squarely puts the image, and everything else, into the public domain, as though the work had been found on Mars. ] 17:33, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:::It's public domain? Great, stick a public domain tag on it. No need for a new tag. License tags are not the appropriate place for your opinions on copyright. --]] 18:15, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)
:Delete, and restore the original copyright tags for all images ] has uploaded (unless a better solution is found). Image copyright notices must be unambiguous. ] | ] 17:09, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete''', copyright tags should contain the licence the image is released under, not sociopolitical rants. --]] 17:27, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)
::What if there is no licence? An explanation is then necessary. ] 17:33, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:::If there is no license, we either
:::*Use it under fair use, in which case it needs a fair use tag and an assessment of whether it is fair use
:::or
:::*We cannot use it because it would be a copyright violation. Your declaration that you will never sue wikipedia about it is nice, but not sufficient. You'd also have to sign away the rights of your heirs to do so, which you can't do unless you licence the image to us which you don't want to do. --]] 18:15, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)
:::Last I checked, every image using this template was licensed in the past under a CC license or the GFDL. Whoever implements removing this template should reinstate the relevant licenses (check the image description page's history). Recall that once something has been released under a license by the copyright holder, it can't be unreleased. ] | ] 15:40, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::::Nope, but he can first release it under a CC or GFDL licence, and then release it into the public domain. Those who have aquired a licence will still have that licence, but in addition they will be free to handle it as an uncopyrighted work, as will everybody else. --]] 17:21, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
:It's best for mankind that this should be '''deleted'''. See also ]. ] | ] 17:56, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete''', templates are not soapboxes. ]<font color=blue>'''&ne;'''</font>] 18:40, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)
:'''Del'''] &mdash;] 19:00, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete''', Misplaced Pages does not endorse anarcho-nihilism. ] 19:33, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete'''. ] 04:43, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:Delete. ] 04:49, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete'''. Poorly named and the poorly defined text in the template is unusuable. Assuming good intentions, whatever this template was trying to accomplish is lost on me at this point. --] 07:55, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete''' -- ] ] 18:54, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete'''. Keep your rants about the morality of copyright to your user page. &mdash;] 18:56, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
:"You may not use this work to do anything unethical (such as accumulating profits)" is a non-commercial use only license, which contradicts the part of the template claiming it is PD. Confusing and meaningless, so delete. ]]
:'''Note''': don't forget ]. Is there any chance of speedying this? ]|] 19:41, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete''', crap. ]<sup>]</sup> 02:29, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)


* For deletion: {{Tlxs|Tfd2|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}|text{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|Why you think the template should be deleted.}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}
===January 20===
* For merging: {{Tlxs|Tfm2|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|other template's name}}}}|text{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|Why you think the templates should be merged.}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}
====]====
----
''On Misplaced Pages, there are a lot of different political views represented. That's a good thing: it makes it a better encyclopedia. But if you want to rant about or praise ''ItemX'', then the article or talk page for ''ItemX'' is not the best place to do it; neither rants nor gushing help neither the article nor the growth of the article. If you want to rant/gush, set up a special page like '''User:YOURUserNAME/''ItemX'' rant page''' or '''User:YOURUserNAME/''ItemX'' gush page'''''.
----


If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add {{tlx|Oldtfdlist|{{var|{{Gray|previous TfD without brackets}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|result of previous TfD}}}}}} directly after the {{para|text}} before the why (or alternatively, after the <code>}}</code> of the <code>Tfd2/Catfd2</code>).
Absolutely unecessary, and used in only one place. ] ] 02:13, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)


Use an edit summary such as <br /><code>Adding <nowiki>]</nowiki></code>.
* Abstain for now. It's not a bad reminder I guess, but the wording is pretty strong and it hasn't been used. Do we have a more general template reminding people to stay focused on the article? Isn't the User namespace still provided with the intent of improving the project? --] 07:59, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. ]<sup>]</sup> 02:30, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)


'''Multiple templates:''' If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:
====]====
After dicussion it was decided to not use this template. It's currently orphaned and theres truly no use for it whatsoever. ] 05:00, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' - K1Bond007, can you provide a link to the discussion about this? -- ] ] 05:31, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)
**Comment: It was between the original author and myself, mostly taking place on his and my discussion pages. ] 06:12, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)


{{block indent| {{Tlxs|Tfd2|{{var|{{Gray|template name 1}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|template name 2 ...}}}}|title{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|meaningful discussion title}}}}|text{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|Why you think the templates should be deleted.}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}}}
====]====
After discussion it was decided to not use this template. It's currently orphaned and theres truly no use for it whatsoever. ] 05:00, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' - K1Bond007, can you provide a link to the discussion about this? -- ] ] 05:31, 2005 Jan 20 (UTC)


You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters <code>|</code> ). Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.
====]====
Useless template. The anon who created it wrote on the template the comment that "this list is incomplete. Please help Misplaced Pages by expanding it." If we really did complete it, it would contain just about every country in East Asia, since at some point they have probably come under Chinese suzerainty. Like I said, a useless template. &mdash;] (]) 01:24, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)


If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:
*'''Delete'''. &mdash;] (]) 01:25, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
*'''<del>Keep</del>'''. &mdash;]] 08:18, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
::Not every country in East Asia paid tributes to imperial China, and many of the countries which paid tributes no longer exist, e.g. Yüeh-Chih (Yuezhi) and Ta-Yuan. &mdash;]] 08:18, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
:::Disregard. First and so far only edit by this user. --]] 06:59, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. A list like this should be an article, not a template. Templates like this would be impossible to work with. Can you imagine having templates for "states that used to be British colonies", "states that used to be French colonies", "states that used to be satrapies of the Persian Empire", "states that came under the control of Germany during WW2", ad nauseam? How many templates would the article of each city, region, and country have at the bottom? 10? 20? This isn't what templates are for. -- ] (]) 03:35, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' useless and sometimes POV to label some relationships as such. Use categories if absolutely necessary, but im leaning against even that. --]] 06:59, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:It does not involve POV and in fact such relationship is usually mentioned in the history article of these states. -- 09:30, January 25, 2005, UTC
::The fact of a tributary relationship need not be POV, but regarding it as something so noteworthy as to merit a series box is. Certainly the informational content should be included in the articles (and in most cases it already is), but I fail to see what value this template adds beyond putting a distinctly Sinocentric POV in these articles. -- ] 04:23, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. Exceedingly dubious in value. For one thing, not all "tributaries" were loyal or regular; some were tributaries at one point and not at another. The Chinese imperial tribute system, although it certainly deserves thorough treatment in Misplaced Pages, was too complex to be depicted in a manner as simplistic as this. The fact of the relationship should be included, but this template should not be used. -- ] 04:23, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Strongly oppose the deletion''' - the box gives a picture of which countries share similar path somewhere in history. The box already links to the corresponding history articles and readers can compare among one former state to another with it easily. &mdash; ]] 07:59, Jan 27 2005 (UTC)
**second vote by same user. i fail to see clear guidelines for listing or a close relationship among members of the group. it helps to use a list instead--]] 11:43, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
***The original vote was already crossed out, leaving only the comment.
***I believe I have made my view clear enough. They share similar path somewhere in history, and they were the states which were under this system of international relations in East Asia. If you strongly believe that the box should be remove then please make sure a link to the list is available at each of the articles on these former states, and each of these articles belong to a category. &mdash; ]] 17:40, Jan 28 2005 (UTC)


{{block indent| {{Tlxs|Tfm2|{{var|{{Gray|template name 1}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|template name 2 ...}}}}|with{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|main template (optional)}}}}|title{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|meaningful discussion title}}}}|text{{=}}{{var|{{Gray|Why you think the templates should be merged.}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>}}}}
====]====
A nonsensical semi-permanent dispute tag. ] 05:49, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
:I added the second template template because it's virtually identical to the first, except uglier. It's saying almost the exact same thing, but if anybody feels that it warrants a seperate entry, go ahead and move it there. -]|] 01:51, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC) (edited 03:14, 23 Jan 2005)


You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters <code>|</code> ), plus one more in {{para|with}}. {{para|with}} does not need to be used, but should be the template that you want the other templates to be merged into. Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.
*Delete. The goal is to fix the article, not load it up with ugly tags. ] 05:53, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. The dispute isn't going away any time soon: in the mean time, people ought to know what's going on, like any dispute tag. (Note: the article in question is ], and the issue is whether the "vulva image" should be there.) &mdash;] 05:55, 2005 Jan 21 (UTC)
**Please don't make templates so that you can put your own editorial comments at the top of a single page. ] 06:00, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
:::It's no more an "editorial comment" than putting up the NPOV template. And of course this template can be used by other articles that may need it. &mdash;] 06:05, 2005 Jan 21 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' -- ] ] 06:13, 2005 Jan 21 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', if there's an NPOV issue, stick an NPOV tag on it. Incidentally, the enduring single issue at ] appears to be whether or not to have an enduring single issue tag on it. Odd, that. --]] 03:09, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. ] 15:08, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' -]|] 15:26, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' --] 15:27, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. ] 17:17, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. ] ] 17:32, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*198 and CookieCaper both added the notice when it was removed, I presume their votes would be 'Keep'. ] 17:51, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
**Not to be confrontational, but I think we should let 198 and CookieCaper vote for themselves. ] ] 20:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Far too vague. Use NPOV or some other more specific template, according to your own specific objection to the article content at present. Also consider entering the page on ] under the section titled Article content disputes. --]|] 19:11, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*** '''Comment''' Whoever created this template: why not create a template denoting an image dispute? I don't think there is one at present. --]|] 19:28, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)


'''Related categories:''' If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code in the {{para|text}} field of the <code>Tfd2</code> template but before the text of your rationale:
=== January 21 ===
{{block indent| {{Tlxs|Catfd2|{{var|{{Gray|category name}}}}}}}}
==== ] ====
|- id="Step III"
(and redirect at ])
! scope="row" style="background-color: orange" | III: Notify users.
| style="padding: 0.5em;" | Please notify the creator of the template nominated (as well as the creator of the target template, if proposing a merger). It is helpful to also notify the main contributors of the template that you are nominating. To find them, look in the ] or ] of the template. Then, add one of the following:


* For deletion: {{Tlxs|Tfd notice|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>
Previously used on only three lists, but redundant with ]. -- ] ] 19:27, 2005 Jan 21 (UTC)
* For merging: {{Tlxs|Tfm notice|{{var|{{Gray|template name}}}}|{{var|{{Gray|other template's name}}}}}} <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>
*
*
*


to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of the ''other template'' for a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to make any interested ] aware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not use ]. ] are a possible way of doing that.
=== January 22 ===
==== ] ====
A new template, by an IP, too. Problem is, it is highly US-centric and filled with red links to articles the IP seems to think should have been written or something. "Gay Friendly Religions" as the first link (in red), not exactly what is that relevant everywhere in the world. "Civil Right Movements" lists US links only (except ILGA) and are the "Log Cabin Republicans" a civil rights movement? And what's "Countries With Organized Gay Populations" supposed to mean? There are lots more countries with gay rights organisations, and not every gay or lesbian living in those countries is a member of some organisation. In other words, highly questionable, that thing. I'd say let's get rid of it. -- ] 09:54, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*I vote '''keep'''. I believe with some editing it can be better. I question the idea of flat out deleting a template that can be useful for Misplaced Pages's entries on the gay community. Here is my analysis of the problem you specified:


'''Multiple templates:''' There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination: please write a personal message in these cases.
* Gay Friendly Religions - Religion is a global matter; it is not "US-centric". Perhaps Misplaced Pages could use an entry detailing the religious beliefs of the gay community not just an article explaining how many religions view homosexuality.
|}
** Religion may be a global matter, but putting it in such a prominent position would seem inappropriate in most countries who recognize "gay" as a community. Most gay people in most places of the world have other priorites.
* Civil Rights Movement - Actually three of the eight links are global organizations. If you can find others to add, please do. The Log Cabin Republicans support efforts for the Republican Party to include gays in policy making.
** Yes, well, but why have so many US-organisations anyway? The English WP is not the USA-WP. And I know what the log cabin republicans are, I just doubt they deserve such a prominent position.
* Countries With Organized Gay Populations - If you notice the links to the countries are entitled "The History of Gays in Canada" and so on. Misplaced Pages could use articles detailing the events and history of Gays in specific countries.
**The title in that case is simply inaccurate. Also, how about writing the articles first and then linking to it? It seems rather pointless to have so many red links in a box.


Consider adding any templates you nominate for TfD to your watchlist. This will help ensure that the TfD tag is not removed.
:If you feel the template needs some editing, go ahead. Why delete a template with the potential of enriching Misplaced Pages? --] 15:12, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:Because I do not see that this template (or similar attempts) does enrich Misplaced Pages. That is a general problem with those boxes, see also ] -- ] 02:25, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)


=== After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors ===
* '''Delete''' Misplaced Pages is not... an advocacy organization, self-help, or support group. Consider creating or joining/starting a Gay/Lesbian cultures or studies project here on Misplaced Pages, and developing a template for that project? - ] 23:49, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD ''(see above)'', nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with ].


To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please avoid Misplaced Pages-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give the ] that it meets.
*:Writing and organizing factual articles on a subject of widespread interest is not advocacy, self-help, or support. It's encyclopedia writing. ] 01:18, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*:Questions how are articles on gay history an "advocacy organization"? When articles on Jewish or African-American history are not? This template is nearly identical to the template entitled ] except gay related. Is template Jew an "advocacy organization" too? --] 17:12, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)


====Notifying related WikiProjects====
*'''Delete'''. It's got POV problems, and it's a series of lists awkwardly forced into infobox format. There might be a place for infoboxes on related history or organization articles, but this template doesn't look like it's going to do the job ]~] 00:01, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
] are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{Tls|Tfd notice}} for this.


Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's '']'' automatically, if they ]. For instance, tagging a template with {{tl|WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in ].
::: I agree, it needs some editing. Misplaced Pages does need an infobox for the pages related to the gay community. --] 17:12, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)


====Notifying substantial contributors to the template====
::::Even edited, I think that this template is doomed to have POV problems. For example, it still starts out with a long list of LGBT support organizations, and omits the groups dedicated to opposing us. "List of . . ." articles with supporting and opposing organizations can work as separate pieces, but in the context of a shared infobox it looks (and is) censored. It also uses this term "the gay community" which perpetuates the falsehood that we all belong to one big club.
While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the ] creator and any main contributors of the template and its talkpage that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the ] or ].
::::When I wrote "infoboxes" I meant just that, more than one. History articles might possibly benefit from a timeline footer, and a common footer or infobox for organizations' articles might make sense, but the infobox under discussion is more of a political advertisement than informative. ]~] 13:47, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)


At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone else will either close the discussion or, where needed, "]" it for another seven days of discussion. (That "someone" ''may not'' be you, the nominator.)
*'''Edited'''. I did some fixing up. Is it suitable now? I feel it no longer fits the prerequisites for a candidate of deletion. --]
:* No, it is not much better now, and therefore remains a candidate for deletion. -- ] 02:25, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Once you have submitted a template here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is successful it will be added to the ] until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.
*'''Delete'''. This template is unnecessary and POV merely by its inclusion. Any pertinent articles can be linked from the ] article. Having an entire template just to link to articles dealing with a particular form of sexual deviancy is a bit gratuitous. This gay template is not analagous to the Jew template. Gay is not a race. ] 00:57, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:*One might also add that there is a ] already, which does a similar job and much better, too. -- ] 02:25, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:*] aren't a race either, but we still have an infobox for them. That said, I'm not a fan of this one. '''Delete''' &mdash;] ] 16:12, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)


Also, consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.
**'''comment''' - If you could please try to keep your personal opinions aside when making your votes. Aside from the plainly inflamitory comment labeling millions humans as deviants, your insinuation that homosexuality is a choice shows a lack of knowledge in the area which you are speaking against, when there have been many studies that show that it may be related to genetics or fetal chemical alterations at critical developmental periods. That aside, please try to make your votes with an air of objectivity, rather then just being objectionable. ] 01:22, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
:*Nothing in my comments were personal opinion. Homosexuality is deviant by definition as it is a significant deviation from 'typical' sexual behavior and one which&mdash;despite its ubiquitous acceptance in Western media&mdash;is not commonly accepted as normal. This is independent of my own opinions on homosexuality and the nature of homosexuality as either voluntary or innate, both of which have no relevance to this discussion. I don't appreciate the insinuation that I'm a bigot. ] 04:09, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::*The problem I am having with what you said, and what you are still saying, is with the extreme negitive connotation of the word "Deviant". "Sexual deviancy" is usually reserved for such things as peadophilia or necrophilia... to apply such a label to the GLBT community causes your motives to be cast into doubt. I hartily admit that "gay" sex is not viewed as "normal", but "normal" and "typical" are both arbitrary terms placed upon by a majority, and thus are inherantly biased. Also, I didn't insinuate you were a bigot, I was insinuating you were being offencive. Homophobe/Bigot are not words I use lightly, certainly not after only first coming into contact with someone. ] 05:16, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
::**Then the problem lies with your understanding of the word "]" surely? --] | ] 18:08, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)


===Twinkle===
::::*If you wanted to get really basic with it, my problem would be with the societal construct behind the connotative meanings underlying deviant, and it's application to objects/states/groups which do not deserve nor qualify these underhandedly-applied, negitive strands of meaning. Society applies more meaning to words then their simple defintion... consider the difference between terrorist and freedom fighter. Either could equally applied, but it's the underlying meanings which give them their edge. Also, just fyi, ] hasn't got a definition on wiktionary yet. ] 23:12, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
] is a convenient tool that can perform many of the posting and notification functions automatically, with fewer errors and missed steps than manual editing. To use Twinkle, click its dropdown menu in the toolbar in the top right of the page: TW ], and then click 'XFD'.


Note that Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them have ]. It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.
*'''<s>Weak</s> Keep''' - It might be useful for use on some of the GLBT related articles, much like the ] template - however, it needs to be heavily edited for both content, pov issues, naming conventions, Americentrism... and surely we can come up with a less garish picture - that one just clashes horribly ] 01:24, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC) Upon pondering it for a while, changing from week to keep. ] 02:10, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)


==Discussion==
*'''Rename and KEEP''' - I am strongly opposed to deleting this template. It is very NPOV as is, especially with that flag, but that is easily changed. I propose that it be renamed to ] and have subsections for the ], ], ], ], and ]. Making a bit of a leap from that point, the Sexual orientation template should be a subsection of a ] template. We probably need a WikiProject Sexuality or something. --] 01:48, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the ] and explain your reasoning.
** One already exists, though it is not well known: ]. ] 02:10, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
**Errrr, ] is not a sexual orientation, thank you very much. Maybe getting some information first before one embarasses oneself with such an error might be advisable. I also recommend the ]. -- ] 02:25, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
**Embarassing myself? Just because there is a movement doesn't mean I have to know all about it. --] 19:21, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)
***I think the point is that you implied that transsexuality is a sexual orientation. It's more of an identity issue than anything -- for instance, a man may wish to be a woman. Whether he is attracted to men or women is not determined by this. --] 23:47, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*Strong '''keep'''! There is not one single reason other than homophobia to delete this template. Notice the statements&#8217; of those who wish it deleted:


People will sometimes also recommend ''']''' or '''subst and delete''' and similar. This means the template text should be "merged" into the articles that use it. Depending on the content, the template page may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.
** Gay related pages are an &#8220;advocacy organization&#8221; (Amgine)
*:: No, Misplaced Pages is not a place for a POV template, and this one has no other need for existence. I also encouraged the creation of a project focusing on G/L studies which would then create a need for such a template. Do not attempt to "interpret" my statement; you are about as far off-base in doing so as it is possible to be. - ]
** Homosexuals are deviant (Nido)


Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at ].
:Even the wiki who brought it up for deletion seemed to feel very agitated when one user placed transgender with other sexual minorities in an apparent mistake. I wonder if that&#8217;s indicative of the wiki&#8217;s feelings towards sexual minorities such as gays. Personal views towards those who are gay have no place in an academic encyclopedia. I am astonished with the amount of homophobia on this discussion. I half expect a book burning to soon take place on other &#8220;deviant&#8221; subjects. ]
::*Yes, anyone who voices opposition against anything remotely related to homosexuality is obviously "homophobic". It doesn't sound like you're pushing an agenda or anything. And thanks for misquoting me. ] 06:52, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)


==Closing discussion==
*'''keep'''.-] 05:03, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Administrators should read the ] before closing a nomination. Note that ] semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.
*'''Keep''', I'm not a specialist in that topic but I see nothing wrong with the template. ] 06:43, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', ditto. Could actually be expanded a little (Maybe Ancient Greece? Maybe the Fa'afafine (sp?) of the Pacific Islands? Maybe add Nazi Germany to the Perscution section?), but certainly this should be kept. ]|<sup>]</sup> ] 06:52, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Ow. My eyes. ] 01:11, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
*Delete - violates NPOV, as well as any standards of style or good taste. This is a worse abuse of templates for POV-pushing than even Mr-Natural-Health's creative abuses of the system - ] 01:41, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:::: What? Recognizing gays as a group on the same level of study as others such as Christians, Jews, African Americans, etc, is a violation of NPOV? Do we need to ensure that gays are seen to be a group unworthy of recognition because they are "deviants" or something? -- ] 19:29, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:::::No. We just need to ensure that people are aware that some people think gays are deviants. Also that homosexuality exists outside of the US. Also, we probably shouldn't have a gay rights image as one of the most prominant pictures on every article involving homosexuality - particularly, say, ]. Beyond that, boxes shouldn't contain red links, boxes should only be used when a category system could not possibly work, and straw man arguments that accuse people who want this box deleted of being homophobic are absurd and offensive, particularly when the main advocate for deletion is one of the most outspoken supporters and editors regarding GLBT issues on Misplaced Pages. ] 12:49, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
:::'''Tally Of Vote'''
* Keep - 8 - apollomelos, gazpacho, arcuras, alterego, scionelement, gadfium, grue, grutness
* Delete - 6 - alexr, davidgerard, snowspinner, nido, imeowbot, amgine
-- ] 19:29, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep but Edit''' On principle I think we should avoid deleting other people's work unless absolutely necessary. On the other hand flying the gay flag seems like a bit of advocacy, regardless of what other groups may have done. And I am in favor of including the "flat Earthers" and putting in a line about the "Behavior modification" sites. We will never sink them but they will surely sink themselves. And I think it will be more honest that way. <br>Oh yes, with that flag there it really is not the most esthetic thing I've ever seen in my life. Let's be a little soft, no? And thank you for asking my opinion!
] 02:49, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Everything gay gets listed for deletion. ] 03:33, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*''Keep but Edit''' -- actually, '''Keep but rebuild from ground up.''' It is ''incredibly'' Americocentric -- you wouldn't know there were any gay people anywhere else in the world. It generalizes gay male culture to all sectors of queer identity, among other ways by using "gay" where "queer" is meant (regardless of whether or not you like the word "queer," it sure as hell isn't just the ''gay'' community or ''gay'' leadership or what have you). A template of this sort would be nice; this isn't it. - ] 03:41, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Convert to footer''' this thing will get in the way of images--]] 03:45, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Won't bother repeating the above sentiments. ]] 04:00, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', hopelessly POV. - ] | ] 12:30, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. What ugen64 said. ] ] 12:39, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - though I would, myself use seperate templates such as {{History of Homosexuality}} on most articles. There is no legitimate reason for this deletion, though users should feel free to edit it. --] ] 12:47, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Deeeeelete.''' ] 02:47, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. Compare ] with the and think carefully about what the purpose of this template could have been. Here's a hint: it starts with "T" and keeps on rolling. A topic box ''like'' this may have merit, and I encourage people to undertake an honest attempt. This definitely isn't one. ] 02:58, 2005 Jan 25 (UTC)
* Delete. I was avoiding voting here, but given then way it has already been abused, I realize it's just a nightmare waiting to happen. ] 03:04, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
*Delete and start again. --]] 03:06, 2005 Jan 25 (UTC)
*I vote strong KEEP. It is a useful heuristic for identifying articles written from a self-consciously gay perspective in order to advance gay causes, in other words, those written from a gay POV. ] 03:13, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)54orFight
*: Thank you, I think your opinion on this is insightful. ] 03:16, 2005 Jan 25 (UTC)
**''in order to advance gay causes'' And there's your problem, right there. Remember NPOV?
--] 04:57, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*** User 5440orflight how come a few weeks ago before you switched your name from Noah Peters you were adding false information to link gays to the Nazi Party? And after your switch you come here and add this comment ''favoring'' gay POVs? I suspect you have other motives than keep..... ]
* Delete. Agree with Raul654. ] 04:19, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
* Delete, trolling. ] 04:24, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' ] 04:27, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete''', and '''start again'''. The potential is there, but this single-person-created, unorganized advocacy list ain't it. Make a project out of it and build it up from scratch. Get some consensus for the proper categories and topics, not just stuff one person threw against the wall to see if it would stick. --] 04:57, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. No one has explained any useful purpose this template would serve that couldn't be better served by one or more lists or categories, along with appropriate wikilinks in articles. Furthermore, there are problems arising from the question of what to include. If the list of articles in the template omits some of those to which the template should apply, then the template is actively misleading readers (for example, a reader could reasonably infer that Misplaced Pages has no article on '']'', given that it's not listed). On the other hand, if the template includes all gay-related articles, it will be huge, and will detract from every such article. If anyone wants to characterize my vote as homophobic, feel free, but I believe it would be ''anti''-gay to subject all articles on gay themes to this kind of intrusive addition. ] 05:58, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
**COMMENT: Why would Lawrence not have the template? It dealt entirely with gay male rights. I think people here don't want to acknowledge that what they are doing by writing and editing articles to advance gay causes is essentially political activity. All of these articles-- homophobia, gay holocaust, Lawrence v. Texas, etc.-- are written from a consciously gay perspective and might as well be tagged with a huge rainbow flag. At least that would be more honest than misleading readers into thinking these articles are npov. I have tried repeatedly to change some of these articles, but have always been reverted and repeatedly branded "homophobic." I'm fed up. Let's put a big rainbow sticker on these articles to show everyone how silly the whole business of politicizing serious historical phenomena is.
***I mentioned the example of ''Lawrence'' because I've edited that article -- for example, by in which I added two assessments of the Supreme Court's decision, one pro and one con. I think the article is reasonably NPOV. Anyway, putting aside your charge of bias, my point is that if this template were to be kept, then '']'' and many other articles could well be added. The box would become so long that it would impair the usefulness of the articles to which it was applied. ] 04:18, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Strong Keep'''. Move arguments about current and potential CONTENT to the template's ''talk page'', limit use until the talk page discussion reaches some consensus. The idea of the template is sound. Presumably, individual articles should discuss both sides of the issue, so such "advocacy"/"homophobic" issues are to be dealt with on a broad spectrum of pages. Depending on the discussion, a footer might be better but again that should be left to the talk page. I strongly support templates linking between main articles in any culture or subculture&mdash;including cultural groups of race, sexual orientation, nationality and any other culture that we can agree exists. There are definite cohesion problems navigating naturally through such collectives and the category/list system doesn't seem to be doing it. Templates seem quite effective when used unobtrusively and carefully. (That this template doesn't do yet, but will.) --] 07:46, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)


</div>
*COMMENT ::: I can see where some of you are coming from. AlexR did mention a pretty good point about the catagory page already. And others did add some helpful input on starting a GLBT project. However anon ip 199.111.225.59 (user who left comment above) please stop vandalizing. I'm not the only one who has asked you. And your ref. to the Holocaust claiming that gays weren't targeted and many Nazis were "known homosexuals" defy facts. It defies facts from both the US Government and the German Government. If you can substantiate your claims will verified sources other than personal home pages or amazon.com conspiracy thoerists books I'd be glad to look over it. ]


== Current discussions ==
*'''An Oddity''' anon ip ] I found it interesting how you are against the template however you added it to a zillion pages. Was that an effort to anger wikis whose pages you were vandalizing to come here and vote delete out of their false belief that someone who favors the template was behind it? Another thing, on the gay Holocaust page I've been reverting contributions you have added and another user who wasn't anon, his name was ]. I did some searching and found out he switched his name to ]. I considered him to be vandalzing gay related pages and now he comes here and makes a comment "*I vote strong KEEP. It is a useful heuristic for identifying articles written from a self-consciously gay perspective in order to advance gay causes, in other words, those written from a gay POV.". Which then other wikis saw that comment and falsely belived it was a gay friendly person REALLY thinking pages should be a gay POV. Is that an attempt to get wikis to vote delete? One more thing, I noticed another user probably a multiple account is doing the same thing as 199.111.225.59 in adding the template to many pages today the name is ]. ]
{{Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j }}}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -1 days }}}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -2 days }}}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -3 days }}}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -4 days }}}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -5 days }}}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -6 days }}}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/{{ #time: Y F j | -7 days }}}}


== Old discussions ==
*'''Delete'''. If kept, this template is likely to become the target of edit wars, and as it currently stands is not NPOV. You're not even going to get agreement as to what pages should (or should not) be marked with it. Getting rid of it avoids a whole bunch of problems best avoided. &mdash;] 19:02, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
{{#invoke:XfD old|transclude}}
*'''Delete''': edit-war magnet, POV to the max --] | ] 18:08, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' ] 18:27, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. ] &rarr; <small>] 03:17, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' ] 08:12, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) I agree with Jiang (? see above). It is so large and flashy in its current form that it would detract from any serious article that it might appear in. However, if it could be made less obtrusive it might serve a useful purpose. It would need to be balanced by a representative list of anti-Gay organizations. I think the important thing about this template is that it flags a considerable, and considerably underrepresented or misrepresented, social group. It could help readers find connections that they would otherwise miss. For instance, there may be a gay weltanschaung in architecture. Does every phallic tower have to be received, in image if not in reality, but a reflecting pond? How often are two towers built side by side, and with no reflecting pools at the bottom? How often are two pools nestled together, and not lorded over by concrete phal-syms? Maybe the same kind of sensibility gets represented in music, in paintings, etc., and nobody ever notices it. Then, as with any social organization, some attention might be directed toward forces that reinforce and forces that fight it. ] 08:12, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' highly US-centric and ugly. What is gay leadership anyway? Have I missed the election? ] 15:38, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)


=== January 23 === == Completed discussions ==
A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at ].
==== ], ], ], ], ], ] ====
These are no longer necessary in MediaWiki 1.4, since it doesn't interpret the <nowiki>{{1}}</nowiki> inside {{{1}}} as a template. ] 07:04, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete all''' -- ] ] 16:02, 2005 Jan 24 (UTC)
* '''Delete all''' -- ] 10:24, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)


For an index of all old and archived discussions, see ].
====]====
This is a misuse of templates. We already have too many boxes and the last thing we would want is to have a box reflecting every territorial change of a particular country. This could bring us twenties and thirties of these stupid pastel colored boxes. (Think:we already have ]) Replace with ], which already exists within this template. --]] 07:11, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*Agreed - '''Delete'''. Not to mention the facts that (1) it could do with some spellchecking ("Posessions"?); and (2) it only includes about 1/3 of the places that should be on the list (only two places listed in Africa? What about Gold Coast, Lagos, Northern Nigeria, Southern Nigeria, Southern Cameroons, Kenya, Uganda, Zanzibar, Tanganyika, Bechuanaland, Swaziland, Basutoland, Sierra Leone, Niger Coast, Oil Rivers, Gambia, Southern Rhodesia, Orange Free State, Transvaal, Cape Colony, Natal, South West Africa, Northern Rhodesia, Somaliland, and Nyasaland? Um... did I miss any?). ]|<sup>]</sup> ] 08:32, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''<del>Keep</del>''' &mdash; Everybody can help enriching the list instead of requesting for deletion. There are a handful of such templates on other colonies (of the Netherlands, of Portugal, for instance). If this template is to be deleted we have to seriously think about the treatment to other similar templates. &mdash; ]] 11:40, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
**3rd edit by this user, the other two were also in support of crap created by the same anon. Please take a look at ]. This is what categories are for. I will nominate the other templates for deletion soon. Just because there's already crap doesnt mean we should allow more crap to exist...and this was all created by the same anon. --]] 22:41, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*Delete - the clutter added is not offset by the information content. -- ]|] 02:51, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*I agree that this list only adds extra clutter to usually very full country pages. And it is especially redundant since any good article on any of these countires should mention it was a British colony. Also, presumably, the purpose of the links is to provide related articles I would be interested in (since I am interested in the one I am now reading), but just because I am reading about the country of Singapore does not mean I am interested in Northern Rhodesia. What we probably should do, though, is place this on each of the pages devoted specifically to the colonial era of that country (for instance on the ] page). That way it is relevant and applicable to the readers of its articles.--] 22:58, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::That leads to a further problem, though... Would someone reading about a colony in the 17th and 18th centuries want to read about, say Tanganyika, a protectorate from 1918? Or would someone reading about Tonga find it worth reading about Darien, a (technically pre-"British" Scottish) colony which failed before Tonga was even discovered by Europeans?
::Theoretically (but highly impractically), each colony might need a list of other contemporaneous colonies. How that could be done though is beyond me. I suspect it wouldn't be via templates, though.]|<sup>]</sup> ] 23:12, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::Delete, unnecessary clutter. - ]
::Delete, use categories. ]<sup>]</sup> 05:42, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Treat this like the bad template for countries once under Chinese suzerainty. &mdash;] (]) 01:51, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. The category, however, is a marvelous idea and should be kept. -- ] 01:58, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Strongly oppose the deletion'''. This box gives readers a clear picture of which countries share a similar path somewhere in history, with the countries that she/he is reading. A category is less instantaneous. However, as for some of the former colonies the former names are linked to, for those using the same names in present day, the <nowiki>]</nowiki> (or the colonial era article if there is one) should be linked instead. &mdash; ]], Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
**second vote by same user.--]] 11:41, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
***The original vote was already crossed out, leaving only the comment. &mdash; ]] 17:43, Jan 28 2005 (UTC)


]
====]====
]
Anyone who cares will already know; to everyone else it is meaningless clutter. &#8212;]]] 19:20, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
]
*'''Delete.''' ] ] 21:31, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
]
*'''Delete.''' Agree with ]. ] ] 01:18, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep.''' If an article is being printed out for an orthodox Jewish friend or relative, the printer may wish to comply with these traditions out of respect. Thys, not everyone who cares will already know. On top of which is the fact that it is an interesting piece of trivia. If you find it too cluttersome at the top of articles - place it at the bottom of the article or on the talk page. --] ] 12:41, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*:If someone has an orthodox Jewish grandparent they might well know this already, just as they ''might'' know not to serve that grandparent bacon for breakfast. (And if we're going to be sensitive to the needs of hypothetical grandparents, let us suppose that someone has a strict Christian fundamentalist grandparent. Shall every article that takes the point of view that evolution is a reality then contain a warning to avoid offending that grandparent's religious sensibilities? I could come up with many more examples.) As for "interesting trivia": link the Tetragrammaton where it appears, and mention the fact in the appropriate article. Should every article containing the word ''the'' have a template explaining interesting trivia about that word? i.e. that it's one of the most common words in English, that it contains two of the most common letters in English, and so forth. &#8212;]]] 14:23, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::too much 'what if'. I could come up with any number of templates with such reasoning. You won't be able to find the article text between them. ] <small>] 17:58, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' -- ] ] 16:02, 2005 Jan 24 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' -- I did not know and therefore it was not meaningless. If this reason for deletion holds water, it could be applied to any text, template or article arbitrarily. The template relates directly to the subject matter and expresses cultural consideration. The "reasoning" here also attempts to speak for two groups of people, "those who already know" (i.e., Jews) and everyone else. In this sense the reasoning could be viewed as biased.] 23:47, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
** If that's the case, should we then add a header or footer that is sensitive to revisionist historians on the ] article warning that it might be offensive to them as it doesn't hold their position that the Holocaust never happened? The template is vague anyway, where ''exactly'' did it teach you?! - ] 01:55, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
***Ta bu shi da yu, I can't tell if your question is meant to be rhetorical, but it is irrelevant by way of poor analogy: "revisionist historianism" is not a religion. This template seems to provide information (which I assume is true -- perhaps it isn't and therefore SHOULD be deleted) that seems to provide useful information on a culturally sensitive issue. If it is misinformation, it should go. If it represents a liturgical "spoiler alert" it should stay. ] 04:31, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
****no need to drag out the holocaust. The argument is still fallacious. If you want to know about the tetragrammaton, read, you know, ]. Really, if this template survives the vote, I will feel compelled to start using ]. ] <small>] 18:15, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
****Explain again how the reasoning is biased? Because it seems like simple logic: If somebody does not know that pages containing the tetragrammaton are supposed to be treated as sacred texts, then they are certainly not going to care about how those pages are handled. If somebody cares about how texts containing the tetragrammaton are handled, then they will know the rules for handling them. <br>For those who say this is "interesting information" and thus should not be removed from the article, well, we ''do'' have hyperlinks to connect relevant information; there is no need to cram every fact about every word onto every page containing that word. (Though I note that those who created and are advocating the use of this template have yet to explain in the article ] exactly how such texts ought to be handled. . .)&#8212;]]] 23:07, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Superfluous. ] 23:48, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', it's not our job to inform people of the rules of their religion. Not unless they're reading the ] article anyway. --]] 23:51, 2005 Jan 24 (UTC)
* Comment: I don't have an opinion regarding its deletion, but if the template is kept then it should be straightforward to write some CSS (in a DIV tag) which means the message is visible only when the page is printed, and invisible when viewed on screen. -- ] 00:06, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete''', we don't teach people the rules of their religion, and we don't instruct others to treat it as the word of God (though it may be). - ] 01:49, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', this is appropriate to mention in ], but not on others.-] 02:30, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', If people think some text does or does not belong in a particular article they are free to edit the article. It's not a reason to delete a template. --] 05:09, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:by this reasoning, why do we vote about any templates at all?
*'''Delete''': Clutter. Information belongs in ] article body. Also note that it's pointless: The tetragrammaton will jump to the eye of those concerned ''much'' more than another little paragraph of text stashed away somewhere. ] <small>] 17:58, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. Besides being clutter, the wording is rather bizarre - "if you print this page the copy should be treated as any other sacred text"? ] 01:19, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. WP needs to respect and embrace a multitude of cultures, beliefs and religions. If this is important to ortodox Jews, why not to keep? --] 04:57, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
** There are plenty of cultures that we cannot embrace or respect without giving up essential WP values. Despite the personal respect that i have for the concern this template attempts to accommodate, it demands we give an unacceptable status to one PoV. --]] 02:20, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. Charles's reasoning is sound. ] | ] 05:02, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Place the template at the bottom of the articles it is used on, but keep the template. ] 09:20, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete.''' Outrageous. Let's warn people that they can end up in hell if they read our articles on ] and ] too. ] 22:50, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. This is, I think, an honest but slightly misguided attempt at cultural sensitivity. While the idea of a sort of "liturgical spoiler warning" entertains me, that's not how this functions. As far as I know, there is no widespread rule against ''seeing'' the Tetragrammaton on a page, and these articles as they stand seem unlikely to cause someone to inadvertently read the name aloud. -] ("<font color="#ba0000"><u>Sarah</u></font>") 00:27, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Del'''. Inherantly can serve no purpose that is consistent with NPoV: can't be fixed. --]] 02:20, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - everybody else said why. --] 05:08, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

===January 26===
====]====
Unused and unlikely to be of much use. (Note that I'm also listing ] at ].)] &mdash;] 20:49, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete'''. Of course, it could be that some day the botany folks will start creating many bush stubs, but that's an entire issue altogether. -- ] 02:09, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete''' before I have the urge to add this to ]. &mdash; ] ] 02:42, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete''' because of probability that it will be vandalized to "This Bush-related article is a shrub." ] 02:57, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
:Delete. ] 03:14, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete''' pointless -- ] 03:15, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete'''. ] &rarr; <small>] 03:16, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
:Hell - I thought when I saw the heading at the top of this page that it ''was'' a botany related stub. '''Delete, delete delete''' (BTW, I have it on good authority from Florida that the vote so far is 7 for keep and 2 for Delete ;) ]|<sup>]</sup> ] 05:54, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::Ahh well I was confused by the voting process. Can I change my vote ;-) . ] &rarr; <small>] 06:30, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
:'''Rename''' both the category and the template as "GWB-related" &mdash; ]] 08:55, Jan 27 2005 (UTC)
:'''Delete'''. ] 17:58, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC) (logged-out Wikipedian casting ])
:'''Delete'''. &ndash;&nbsp;{{User:Flamurai/Signature}} 18:42, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
:'''Keep'''. Important political figure. --]</font> | ] 18:59, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

=== January 26 ===
==== ] ====
(and redirect at ])

Completely redundant with other ]. -- ] ] 21:32, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
*
*
*

==== ] ====
(and redirect at ])

Previously used on only about a dozen lists, but completely redundant with ]. -- ] ] 20:42, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
*
*
*

==== ] ====
Functional duplicate of ]. See ] for a description of the standard templates used to link to these sources. -- ] ] 23:19, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
* '''Delete'''. No longer necessary, although I must protest Netoholic's referral to the so called "standard" templates when they are being contested. -- ] 00:59, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

==== ] ====
Created as a sort of "meta-template", a bad process. I agree on standardization, and simplifying the sister project links, but this meta-template will only serve to defeat that goal. Complexity and ] are insidious (see ]). There is (some) drain on the database when calling a meta-template since there must be an extra read and more computation. Its probably neglible, but as these templates are used on more and more pages, it adds up and is '''avoidable'''. Also, whenever this meta-template is changed ''every'' page using one of the child templates will be purged from the cache and have to be re-read. This is another '''avoidable''' drain. -- ] ] 15:53, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
:''] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]] --]] 03:03, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)''
::'']] 04:28, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)]''
*'''Keep''' until some comment from a developer that this is causing meaningful strain exists. ] 19:06, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. There are at present 13 sister project templates (with more on the way), and keeping them consistent without using a template is impossible. (Also, this is a lot like ], and needn't be changed that often.) -- ] 01:12, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
** Your statement seems to imply a different course of action. We should carefully consider which sister project templates to keep around. If we limit the number of those templates, keeping them consistent is not a problem. Look at MetaPicstub - because of its existence, we are now forced to deal with dozens and dozens of unnecessary ], with no end in sight. -- ] ] 03:51, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*** Stub-sorting seems to work just fine. By the way, regarding caching issues: we are all clear on the fact that making changes manually to all templates would destroy the server cache of as many pages as modifying this one template? Of course, using a single template would make it ''easier'' to destroy the server cache of many pages, but that is one kind of vandalism I have not yet run across. -- ] 09:38, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' ] 22:53, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:*Can anyone outline exactly how much of a burden this is? If we're talking an extra DB query on top of 100 queries for a page then it's not worth fretting over. ] 01:16, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', I agree with Netoholic's arguments. I have by the way removed the <nowiki>{{tfd}}</nowiki> tag to keep the deletion box from confusingly appearing on all pages with a sister project link that uses this. ] | ] 23:20, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
** Is this process legitimate without the tag? I've added a note above that solves the problem without requiring the removal of the tag<s>, and i will put the tag back</s>. --]] 03:03, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*** Aha! Netholic already put it back, which is why i didn't have to dissect a second history to get here. --]] 03:18, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
***The problem is that the message shows up next to the sister project link on all pages that use <nowiki>{{wikibooks}}, {{wiktionary}}</nowiki> etc. This is confusing. ] | ] 13:09, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
**** Itai, rather than waiting for this to end, keeps adding it back into the sister project templates, creating this problem. If only he had a little patience, since there is no immediate urgency. -- ] ] 15:53, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*****Until this vote is decided, we have two alternatives: using the meta-template, and not using it. In the former case, the tfd tag is harmful. In the latter, the tfd tag serves no purpose since no one will see it. If you "won" your revert war with Itai, sure, the tag could be kept. But right now it keeps changing back and forth, and therefore the most '''practical''' solution is to hide the tfd tag. He may be creating a problem, but you are taking the wrong approach to solving it. ] | ] 17:53, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. The template features were intentionally designed to support this kind of nesting, so the DB load issue is unlikely to be real. And this technique is a good step toward democratizing the ability to write usable templates without getting a PhD in this box-building language (that i for one gave up on once most of a year ago, and is ''still'' quirky enough to quickly scare me off earlier this month). --]] 04:28, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' It is a very very useful template. ] 09:40, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' for now. There are currently 8 ] to which templates of this type might refer and it is very useful to have a standard format. Contrary to what has been said earlier (both here and in various other places) it is '''not''' "bad practice" to transclude templates within other templates: the system does indeed provide for this implicitly. Having said that, there has been a tendency for these templates to proliferate and spawn too many subtle and IMNSHO unnecessary variations. I have started a discussion ] about rationalising the situation. --] | ] 11:17, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I use it often enough. --] 13:05, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
** Yes... since it's creation just one day ago? -- ] ] 15:53, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 18:08, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. &ndash; ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 18:12, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

===January 27 ===
====] & ]====
are redirects to ]--] | ] 20:51, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

====]====
Just seeking input on another stub creation (created yesterday with limited usage). Is there a necessity to seperate all the different professions under ]? It's not my creation, but wanted to field some comments... ] 22:15, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Keep'''. The reason that this has limited usage is that it was just created (not by me). I thought it was a good idea and started filling it up by searching on Google for articles displaying the people stub text and the word "actor" and got 154 hits (the template text alone shows up on 951 pages&mdash;this is a substantial sub-group). ] is enormously bloated at the moment. The point of stub categories is to get them small enough that someone with an interest in that particular subject can go through looking for articles to fix. ] is ''far'' to big for that top happen.
:(I guess I'll have to wait another week before filling up the category, though. Can we start the discussion on the template talk page next time?) -] ("<font color="#ba0000"><u>Sarah</u></font>") 22:21, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
::I started talk there to. But since only a small number have editted with the category it's of limited knowledge that it exists. Unless someone was watching ] (or had an actor on their watchlist that was changed--like me) they'd never know it was there. I hate to use WP:TFD this way (to solicit input) but if there was a consensus not to continue with it then I thought it'd be best to stop sooner rather than later. I do find your rationale compelling, but I'd like to leave this here to get more input. ] 22:26, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

: Since I created it, I won't vote, but I will explain my reason for creating it. There is ], which people were putting television actors into. The problem is that most actors don't just do television, so putting them in this category is too specific. There are also ], ], ], ], so it seems appropriate to have a stub category for actors as well. I understand your reasoning, but it seems to be that if this were to be deleted, every other sub-stub of bio-stub should be deleted as well. &ndash;&nbsp;{{User:Flamurai/Signature}} 22:55, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

:'''Keep'''. BTW:The place for discussions on stubs is at ] and the talk pages for the Wikiproject. ] 08:35, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:'''Keep''' &mdash; ] ] 09:08, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

=== January 28 ===
==== ] ====
Cleaning up links to ]. This is redundant with standard ] (which states "by or about"). -- ] ] 05:27, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
: Note: ] now reads "Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: X" - a somewhat more open phrasing. -- ] ] 18:19, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
* Good point about reducing many to one, but you would have to make sure that articles with removed themplated got the replacement one. --] ] 10:08, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
** Already done. Most of these badly-planned templates only make it onto a few articles, so it's easy to clear them. -- ] ] 10:31, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*** Yeah, but the ] is also listed for deletion... ]] 11:01, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
**** Actually, it is the related ] template that is for deletion. The author of it keeps screwing up the good templates by adding it to them. -- ] ] 15:59, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
* I vote '''Keep'''. I think it looks bad to say "a collection of quotes by or about stupidity", because it's nonsensical to speak of quotes ''by'' stupidity. I think it looks more professional to specify that they are quotes ''about'' stupidity. &ndash; ] <sup>(]) (])</sup> 13:04, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
** Which is why this was in use on exactly one article before I TFD'd it? No, we need fewer one-off templates for this usage, not more. -- ] ] 15:59, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
* When I created this template, it was because I noticed at the bottom of ], which was a featured article, that "Wikiquote has a collection of quotes by or about Sarajevo". Noticing that there could be no quotes by Sarajevo, I made the template, which stated that "Wikiquote has a collection of quotes about Sarajevo". The fact that it is not used in all articles where it should be, means that it should be used, not that it should be deleted. I, of course, vote '''keep'''. ''Maybe'' it could be deleted, if Template:Wikiquote would be changed to cover for both possibilities (for example "Wikiquote has a collection of quotes related to X"). <br>I'd also like to thank to user who listed this template for deletion for informing me, on my talk page, about it; otherwise, I would completely miss the deletion. It is something which I believe should be standard practice when deleting articles created by regular users. ] 17:23, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
** It is so much better to find a common turn of phrase to address these problems, rather than extra templates to cover specific grammar forms. I have done as you suggested and changed it to read "Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: X". Please reconsider your vote. -- ] ] 18:19, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)

==== ] ====
Keep. ] 20:51, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

==== ] ====
(and ])

Cleaning up links to ]. These are redundant with ] usage (which can point to specific Wikibooks sections). -- ] ] 05:27, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*

==== ] ====
Cleaning up links to ]. This is currently unused and redundant with ] usage (which can point to specific Wikibooks sections). -- ] ] 05:35, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*

==== ] ====
Cleaning up links to ]. This is currently unused and redundant with ] usage (which can point to specific Wikibooks sections). -- ] ] 05:35, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*
==== ] ====
Ditto. -- ] ] 06:14, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*

==== ] ====
Ditto. -- ] ] 06:14, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*

==== ] ====
Ditto. -- ] ] 06:14, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*

==== ] ====
Ditto. -- ] ] 06:14, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*

==== ] ====
Ditto. -- ] ] 06:14, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)
*

==Holding Cell==
These templates need to be deleted, but may still be in use on some pages. Somebody (Admin or otherwise) should remove them from pages so that they can be deleted. If you've cleared a page, note it here.


===Remove Entirely===
*] clear ] 09:46, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*] clear ] 09:46, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*]
*]] clear ] 09:46, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*] clear ] 09:46, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*]
*] and ] clear ] 09:46, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*]
*] clear ] 09:46, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*] clear (but not ]) ] 09:46, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
*]
*], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]
*], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]
*]

This can't be deleted at present due to a software flaw. ] 01:52, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

===Convert to category===

====]====
* This template is too big and looks hideous when there are multiple boxes such as at ]. Templates are not replacements for lists just because they look cool. The women here from different years have no close relation among each other to warrant this template. Link to ] (template box duplicated there) and make a category instead. --]] 11:08, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
** '''Delete''', mainly due to its size. The ones for individual champions (such as ]) aren't as bad, but this is too unwieldy. ] 17:14, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
**'''Move to article'''. The organization is good, and each article transcluding it could be changed to merely link it, alleviating the space issue. ] 10:05, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
:::Well, the information's already in ]. Perhaps adding everybody to ] would be the best solution. ] 10:13, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
::::That page is great. Section links are the answer here. Replace transclusions with links like this: <nowiki>]</nowiki>. ] 10:24, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
*Ill use of template system. This needs to be a category and a list-of article - ] 01:43, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

'''If this doesn't get converted to category in another week, I'm going to just skip to the deletion part. This is absurd.''' ] 01:57, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

===Footer===

<!-- Don't edit below this line, except to add categories and interwiki links. -->
]

Latest revision as of 16:32, 17 December 2024

Page for discussing mergers and deletions of templates "WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, see Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion. This page is about discussion of templates. For a list of templates used for discussion, see Misplaced Pages:List of discussion templates. Find this page confusing? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!
Shortcut
XFD backlog
V Oct Nov Dec Jan Total
CfD 0 0 3 39 42
TfD 0 0 0 4 4
MfD 0 0 0 0 0
FfD 0 0 5 7 12
RfD 0 0 28 35 63
AfD 0 0 0 0 0
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

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

How to use this page

What not to propose for discussion here

Shortcut

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

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

Reasons to delete a template

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

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

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

Listing a template

Shortcuts

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

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

Note:

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

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

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

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

/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Misplaced Pages's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025_January_13#Template:template_name.css */
II: List the template at TfD. Edit today's TfD log and paste this text to the top of the list:
  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

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

Use an edit summary such as
Adding ].

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors

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

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

Notifying related WikiProjects

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

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

Notifying substantial contributors to the template

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

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

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

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

Twinkle

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

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

Discussion

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

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

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

Closing discussion

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

Current discussions

January 13

Template:Song about the Margaret Evans

This template was apparently sitting at the bottom of Jacob Aaron Westervelt for about fifteen years until I removed it just now. It is not a navbox. It might be worth incorporating into the article. I have copied the template's content to the article's talk page for reference. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Limerick Minor Hurling Team 1958

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 14:41, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Swiss Figure Skating Championships

All articles were redirected to the parent article per this AFD, rendering this template obsolete. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:20, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Rower–Inistioge Hurling Team 2014

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 00:48, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Tipperary Junior Hurling Team 1930

Single use template The Banner talk 00:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Tipperary Minor Hurling Team 1930

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 00:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Kerry Minor Hurling Team 2014

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 00:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Miss Nicaragua winners in the Big Four pageants

Only one link to an article of relevance. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:12, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Australian Figure Skating Championships

Per this Afd and my recent edits redirecting the remaining articles due to over a decade or six years of no sources and/or in-depth coverage of the annual event. No articles to navigate to or with. Template is no longer needed. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

  • KEEP. I restored some of the articles which had been sourced, and deleted straight redirects from the template, leaving five valid articles remaining on the template. Plus we will create at least the most recent championship (2024-25). Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:19, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


January 12

Template:NJ Transit Bus Garages And Yards

Pointless & unnecessary template mostly comprised of redirects & red links and is redundant to NJ Transit bus garages. Tinton5 (talk) 23:34, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Parties in Austrian landtage

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links. Created in 2013, last edited for content in 2020. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:44, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Page check

No transclusions or incoming links. Created in 2018. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:34, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Infobox United States Congress

Comparing this infobox with Template:Infobox legislative term, it provides far less detail and is inconsistent with articles on other legislative bodies. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:NGC objects

This template does not show up on the mobile version of the site, and so is not useful for the majority of readers. It seems simple enough that it could be replaced with "See also" links, or maybe just a link to List of NGC objects. -- Beland (talk) 10:16, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep. I made the template. If a list is split for size reasons then it's common to provide navigation in the lead. Mobile has chosen to omit navigation templates for space reasons. I don't think that's a reason to also remove them from desktop. List of NGC objects (1–1000) has twice as many desktop views as mobile . All the numbered lists already link List of NGC objects in the opening paragraph. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:39, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
    Those stats imply mobile readers may be having trouble navigating these lists compared to desktop readers - if so, adopting an alternative nav solution would help. -- Beland (talk) 12:17, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
    Mobile has more total page views at the English Misplaced Pages but specialized science articles usually have more desktop when I check it. A factor two is probably above average. Desktop users are used to navigation templates and for a split list it's nice to have it at the top. We could add see also links but I don't think it should be a replacement for a normal navigation template. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
  • This template does not show up on the mobile version of the site, and so is not useful for the majority of readers. is more or less an invalid argument at TFD. It might be fair to do elsewise with this template, but that is an insufficient rationale for deletion. Izno (talk) 20:20, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
    I find it odd that "should be replaced with something that works better for all readers" would be considered an invalid argument. I could see arguing against the idea if you don't think there's a better alternative, but not categorically opposing such proposals on general principle. -- Beland (talk) 21:09, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
    It's a general argument. If you think {{sidebar}} should be deleted, you should argue for that in a TFD about {{sidebar}}. It's also actually a bad general argument, because you also have to argue that {{navbox}} should be deleted as well if that is the rationale. Izno (talk) 21:16, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
    Sure, other stuff exists, but not every instance of those templates is as easy to replace as this one. Plus, deleting those templates would be a huge amount of work, whereas this is a rather contained task. Probably something needs to be done about those not showing up on mobile too, but it would be easier to do that if we have solved subproblems first, and gained experience with what kind of replacement mechanisms are feasible and supported by consensus. If editors want there to be desktop-only nav templates that supplement those visible to mobile readers, that's useful information which indicates those mega-templates should probably stick around. But not having that conversation on the grounds we're not completely solving a million-article problem does not really generate useful information about what's feasible and desirable. -- Beland (talk) 09:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
    Which still makes a generic argument. But it's also one that's totally irrelevant to this template also.
    If you want to argue for a broader deletion of sidebars and navboxes, this TFD ain't it. Picking at it template by template is simply going to get users irate with you for a non-existing deletion criterion and terrible argument to boot. Izno (talk) 21:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
    What do you think about the actual merits of using a different navigation mechanism in this case? -- Beland (talk) 05:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
    Beland What exactly are you suggesting this other mechanism be? A way to navigate between all these pages without having to scroll down seems sensible to me. Trialpears (talk) 14:15, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ 17:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Multiple Basketball Roster Templates

Propose merging Template:Player3, Template:PlayerW, Template:Basketball roster player, Template:IFNA player, Template:Sports roster, and Template:Sports roster/entry with Template:Player2.
We apparently have a plethora of templates that are designed to show basketball players in a roster format. We should combine them into a single well-named template that uses some if's and switches to show/hide fields based on presence or absence from the template usage. MikeVitale 14:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:TACTIC (web framework) version

Unused as TACTIC (web framework) was deleted. Gonnym (talk) 12:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:PD-USGov-DOC-NWS

Per discussion at c:Commons:Requests for comment/Third-party images published by the National Weather Service, not all files obtained from the National Weather Service are in the public domain or otherwise under a free license. To be specific, the NWS often uses photographs from third parties, but only rarely has the photographer actually agreed to a release of rights. Due to this, the equivalent Commons template c:template:PD-NWS has been deprecated. I believe the same should be done for this one.

@Rlandmann has taken the effort to contact the NWS and was told "not all images credited to members of the general public are in the public domain." The NWS has also "removed the questionable language on the disclaimer page." Rlandmann also reached out to various photographers named on the NWS website, and in many of those cases, the author asserted they still own the rights to the image (see c:Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/PD-NWS review/A25 for examples).

While there are very few files on the English Misplaced Pages that use this template, their provenance should be carefully established. I will open separate FfDs for such files later. Ixfd64 (talk) 04:43, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete -- a systematic review of several hundred files on the Commons revealed that the reasoning expressed in this template does not hold up to scrutiny. Unfortunately, we cannot presume that any third-party content sourced from the NWS is free. --Rlandmann (talk) 10:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Keep with hatnote The keyword is some files, not all files. EF 13:20, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
  • The rationale expressed in the template is nonsensical and at odds with reality. Many or most of the statements included in the template are outright wrong, and one that is true is taken so far out of context as to render it highly misleading.
Besides of which, it's completely redundant. Any free images sourced from the NWS can (and should) be hosted on the Commons. What possible purpose does this template serve? --Rlandmann (talk) 01:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per Rlandmann's explanation.
Penitentes (talk) 15:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Sten derivatives

Unusual template, but no links. Absolutiva (talk) 04:04, 12 January 2025 (UTC)


January 11

Template:Kerry Minor Hurling Team 2012

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 20:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Kerry Minor Hurling Team 2009

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 20:31, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Ballysaggart Hurling Team 2014

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 20:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Thomastown Hurling Team 2013

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 20:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Danesfort Hurling Team 2007

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 20:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Cork intermediate hurling team managers

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 20:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Cork Intermediate Hurling Team 2015

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 20:28, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Ballinhassig Hurling Team 2003

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 20:28, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Ballymartle Hurling Team 2011

Single use template The Banner talk 20:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Tipperary Junior Hurling Team 1990

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 20:25, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Muscovite Constitution

Propose deleting per WP:TG, Template function should be clear from the template name, and Templates should be clearly documented as to their usage and scope. and this template fails at both, plus it is original research. There was no such thing as a "Muscovite Constitution", nor a strictly defined set of "Inaugural documents" of the "Tsardom of Russia" or "Muscovy". . Although all of the items included in this navigational template had some sort of institutional, political, cultural, socio-economic, or religious significance in the 16th century, they were not consciously centrally planned, developed, organised and gathered as a single, strictly defined set of documents of the Tsardom of Russia (at most a stamp of approval from the tsar or patriarch), nor was this done by later historiography of Russia (as far as I am aware). It's an arbitrary mix of secular law, church law, genealogical lists, household rules, and three different chronicles of various genres with different audiences and patrons. This template has no equivalents on ruwiki or other wikis either, there is no equivalent name for these terms or this concept in the Russian language etc.; it is all a 2012 enwiki invention. NLeeuw (talk) 08:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Sym

Propose merging Template:Sym with Template:Symbol.
{{Symbol}} allows for free-form links to images as symbols; {{Sym}} has a limited set of built-in stock options (e.g. {{Sym|check}} → ‹See TfM›Done), but throws an error if given an unknown parameter. I think it would be better to have one template which simply treats unknown parameters are files names, thus merging the functionality. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Afghanistan Premier League

Only one season blue-link and redlinks; no use in a navbox. Vestrian24Bio 04:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Nepal Premier League

Only one season blue-link and redlinks; no use in a navbox yet. Vestrian24Bio 04:12, 11 January 2025 (UTC)


January 10

Template:Finance ministers of Russia

All three templates should be merged on the basis of Template:Finance ministers of Russia. It should be a single template of RSFSR – Soviet Union – Russian Federation finance ministers. It will ease navigation too. I hope that someone will do that, because I don't know how to merge templates. MarcusTraianus (talk) 09:39, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte 19:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Psf

Used once... in 2012. Clearly not something that is needed any more; recommend subst before deletion to preserve the archive. Primefac (talk) 19:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

It was used many more than one time (it's used over 250 times on Portal:Speculative fiction/Upcoming/Archives/2012), but I agree it's not been used for at least 12 years, so subst and then delete. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 21:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Why not just move it into portal space like so many other portal components? Not opposed to deletion and it shouldn't be in template space but a move seems like the simplest way to do that while preservingthe archives. Trialpears (talk) 14:04, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Commnet Perhaps portal space may be the right place to move it for preservation purposes. If not, subst and delete will still be a way of preserving the material. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:OrgSynth preps

Unused and broken (seemingly unfixable). Template's sole role is to generate a link to search-results at a resource that does not appear to have allowed direct linking to search-results in over a decade. There was one transclusion, which I removed; there are a handful of hardcoded links to the URL target but they do not appear to be subst'ed versions of this template and I see no docs that recommend using this template.

Links to previous comments and discussion: Template talk:OrgSynth preps#Broken (December 2018), Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Chemistry#Shall we kill Template:OrgSynth preps? (January 2025) DMacks (talk) 18:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Indre senators

Unused and only two links. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Numbered routes in Rhode Island

Per Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 April 1 and other precedents, these have been considered redundant to both Numbered routes in Rhode Island and Category:Numbered routes in Rhode Island for quite some time. Some 19 of these navboxes have been deleted over the years as listed at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Precedents#Highway system navboxes. Additionally, by actively deploying them, they distort Special:WhatLinksHere for any entry in the box because they all now link to each other. Imzadi 1979 → 01:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep - This template helps users move between each route with only one click. Several Interstate Highways have navigation boxes. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
    The Interstate Highways have navboxes to their related routes that they intersect, thus they're already linked in the real world and in the article. Rhode Island Route 122 does not connect to Rhode Island Route 238 in the real world (for one example), and yet they're both linking to each other now because of this navbox. That distorts and somewhat destroys the utility of Special:WhatLinksHere/Rhode Island Route 122 because everything now links to everything else in this set of 61 articles.
    Numbered routes in Rhode Island provides greater context to each article if a reader of Route 122 is looking for another route to read about, while the navbox contains no context other than being a list of links. The extra click to get that context is worth that minimal effort. Imzadi 1979 → 01:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
    In musical ensemble navigation boxes, some songs in the template do not connect in real life to other songs/albums in the same document (which is sometimes the case with many items in a navigation box). The "utility of Special:WhatLinksHere/Rhode Island Route 122" is irrelevant. Template {{Simon Property Group}} was created, and it was discussed that it should be kept, because users can access other facilities with only one click. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
  • delete, over navboxing. a category does a better job here. Frietjes (talk) 15:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:*sound2

Propose merging Template:*sound2 with Template:*sound.
Only cosmetic differences between the templates. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Pfff

Contains only an embedding of File:Hm and sigh.ogg; used only in Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Free Melania (2nd nomination). Subst and delete. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)


January 9

Template:Bennettsbridge Hurling Team 2015

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 23:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Tyrone county hurling team managers

Single use template The Banner talk 23:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Down Minor Football Team 1966

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 23:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Wexford Under-21 Hurling Team 1973

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 13:00, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Wexford Minor Hurling Team 1966

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 13:00, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Cork Minor Hurling Team 1937

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 12:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Bennettsbridge Hurling Team 2016

WP:NENAN, just 4 players and 1 staff The Banner talk 12:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Meath Minor Football Team 1990

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 12:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Meath Hurling Team 2016

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 12:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Armagh Minor Football Team 1949

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 12:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Disproved conjectures

I don't think this is coherent enough as a group for a navbox; contrast Category:Disproved conjectures. Topics included are unrelated to each other and come from a wide variety of mathematical disciplines. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC)


January 8

Template:Character templates

No transclusions or incoming links. This navbox appears to duplicate Category:Character templates. It may be useful, since it has the actual characters in it, so I would not object to it being added to the documentation of the linked templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

It's WIP that I don't feel is ready for prime-time yet. If its unused status bothers you either add it to appropriate pages, or else draftify it until I can get it "finished". Useddenim (talk) 15:13, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Draftify per creator. Gonnym (talk) 16:39, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Calendar clock with Misplaced Pages stats info

No transclusions or incoming links. Created in May 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Bureaucrat Ribbon

No transclusions or incoming links from discussions. Created in early 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:BVC was

No transclusions. If a no-link version of {{Colombian Securities Exchange}} is needed, an if statement can be coded into that template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Year in sports

No transclusions or incoming links from discussions. This template, created in 2022, does not appear to have been adopted, or something preferred has replaced it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Delete. I thought it would be useful. It's not. SWinxy (talk) 18:02, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Cork Minor Football Team 1976

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 14:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Dublin Football Team 1901

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 14:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Dublin Football Team 1904

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 14:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Communist rulers

Doesn't really seem to be appropriate for a navbox, there's no specific article on the subject, and why we would need to navigate between leaders of countries unrelated other than their political alignment on the same navbox is beyond me. --woodensuperman 13:49, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Delete – Purely cosmetic and not useful functionally. Each entry already has a host of navboxes with more directly relevant articles. Yue🌙 08:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Ruhuna cricket team

A "current" squad template for a team which no longer exists following restructuring of Sri Lanka domestic cricket, Ruhuna cricket team last played a fixture in 2013, a old squad listing is on the Ruhuna page but a template (never updated after creation) is not required. JP (Talk) 13:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:KTL

Unnecessary navbox (only two links). 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:EF9C:2836:D3E7:518C (talk) 11:26, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:JPX

Unnecessary navbox. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:EF9C:2836:D3E7:518C (talk) 11:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:INI

Unnecessary navbox. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:EF9C:2836:D3E7:518C (talk) 11:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Delete. No albums have articles and only one band member has an article. Gonnym (talk) 11:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:ASG

Unnecessary navbox (only four links, one of which is a redirect). 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:EF9C:2836:D3E7:518C (talk) 11:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Keep. 4 links is enough here, however, all the non-links should be removed. I've tagged the articles for notability. Gonnym (talk) 11:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Hex

Unnecessary navbox (only three links). 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:EF9C:2836:D3E7:518C (talk) 11:12, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Keep, and there are 4 links. Gonnym (talk) 11:53, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:RBX

Unnecessary navbox (only two links). 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:EF9C:2836:D3E7:518C (talk) 11:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Delete per nom. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 04:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Grayscale (band)

Only contains two links QuietHere (talk | contributions) 08:34, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Race and the United States presidency

No mainspace article that relates to the subject of the navbox. Pretty much could be seen as a random collection of racial issues concerning American presidencies. Has overlap with articles on Template:United States policy for Native American policy but even those articles are not classified as a racial policy under a category of relation or in a subcat.

And articles such as A More Perfect Union (speech) has nothing to do with Obama's presidency. Because it took place before he was president while he was running for president in 2008. I think this template falls into the OR category. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:05, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 02:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)


January 7

Template:Aviation accidents and incidents in Indonesia

Foreseeable that the scope of this template will become too broad (see Russia and France), and thus has been partitioned in three. DemocracyDeprivationDisorder (talk) 11:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 21:50, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:LDE

Single-use citation template from 2020; subst and delete as clearly not as widely needed as expected. Primefac (talk) 21:19, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Subst and delete per nom. Citation templates should have a large amount of usages for them to be created. Gonnym (talk) 11:57, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Danish Figure Skating Championships

Full of red links. The two remaining blue links are redirects. Nothing to navigate. ✗plicit 14:09, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Dublin Football Team 1908

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 13:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Dublin Football Team 1898

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 13:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Dublin Football Team 1899

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 13:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Galway Football Team 1925

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 13:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:NGC objects:7500-7840

Propose merging Template:NGC objects:7500-7840 with Template:NGC objects:7000-7499.
(And rename to Template:NGC objects:7000-7840.) Dropping redlinks and redirects to the list of NGC objects has shrunk the number of articles in these templates to less than half the previous amount. The lists are segmented by thousands, so it would be more consistent to have the nav templates segmented that way, too. I expect many of the other articles currently listed will be determined to be not-notable per WP:NASTRO and will be redirected to the list as well (so these templates will keep shrinking). -- Beland (talk) 10:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Keep. For now. The inconsistency at the -99 and -00 cutoff between the list articles and the templates will need to be addressed first before any merger action should be taken on the templates. As it currently stands, there remain 68 and 135 (09:31 edit: corrected figure) articles linked respectively, let it whittle down further for a bit. DemocracyDeprivationDisorder (talk) 09:20, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Do you have a preference as to whether to end on -99 or -00? -- Beland (talk) 05:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Personally I'm more in favour of a -00 cutoff simply because that's what the corresponding articles split off at. DemocracyDeprivationDisorder (talk) 13:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

LFP Ligue templates

Both templates are currently broken due to the website change with the new sponsor. Some links are archived so it could be changed to be similar to {{LFP}}, but someone would need to go through all 700 uses, so I don't think it'sworth it. Nobody (talk) 07:28, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Finnish Figure Skating Championships

All individual articles were redirected to the parent article per this AFD, rendering this template unnecessary. Bgsu98 (Talk) 03:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


January 6

Template:Estonian Figure Skating Championships

All individual articles were redirected to the parent article per this AFD, rendering this template unnecessary. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Blackmagic Design Cameras

Bloated template, all the entry circle-link to three article and the rest is WP:RED, also the main article already have a better table listing all product-line in similar style to that of other camera template Elevator VendingMachine 21:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Big Four pageant winners by country footer

This exists only to facilitate navigation from articles into templates, which is improper. It would be logical to navigate from one list to another, but not into a bare navigation box. In many cases the lists have been deemed to violate SYNTH, see for instance Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Belize at major beauty pageants and subsequent batch nominations at Special:Permalink/1036690997, Special:Permalink/1037877047, and Special:Permalink/1038545583, so we shouldn't go forward with that either. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

That's not quite right. It navigates a regular encyclopedia user out of an article and into a template. For example clicking the "Australia" link at Precious Lara Quigaman takes you to Template:Miss Australia winners in the Big Four pageants. Presenting a template page out of context of any article isn't a thing we should do for regular encyclopedia users. Australia at Big Four beauty pageants would be a more logical link to place in the footer, but it can't be there because we have found repeatedly that such lists violate various principles including WP:INDISCRIMINATE. So it seems to me that this footer is basically an end-around the non-notability problem, but results in a crummy experience for the reader. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:05, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Limerick Football Team 1896

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 11:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Louth Football Team 1910

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 11:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:DR case status/core

Unused sub-template. Gonnym (talk) 11:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Creator comment - Speedy delete, no concerns about deletion of this. This template was originally a fork of Template:SPI case status which does use the /core sub template, but this template was re-worked since then. Steven Crossin 18:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Dublin Football Team 1896

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ 14:37, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 11:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Template:Dublin Football Team 1897

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 11:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Galway Football Team 1941

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ 14:37, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 11:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Template:Galway Football Team 1940

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ 14:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 11:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Template:Galway Football Team 1938

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 11:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Phabricator/sandbox/styles.css

Unused style template as both the live and sandbox don't use this. Gonnym (talk) 11:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Hebrewterm

Unused language template. Same result can be achieved with {{Langx}}. Gonnym (talk) 11:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Galway Football Team 1934

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 10:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Galway Football Team 1933

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ 14:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 10:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Template:Mayo Minor Football Team 1958

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ 14:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Single use template The Banner talk 10:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Template:Galway Under-21 Football Team 1981

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ 14:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:NENAN The Banner talk 10:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Template:Mortal sin in the Catholic Church

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was speedily deleted by BusterD. WP:G4 was applied. (non-admin closure) —Alalch E. 13:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Simply a listing of random bad things (template link spam) - Censorship by copyright or Malware is related to "Mortal sin" or the "Catholic Church"?

WP:NAVBOX guidelines
  • All articles within a template relate to a single, coherent subject.
  • The subject of the template should be mentioned in every article.
  • The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent. Moxy🍁 07:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete. If the Catholic church does actually take a stand against these issues, the proper place to discuss it would be in an article expressing their thoughts on each commandment. The catholic church's (alleged) opinion does not belong in a navbox at the bottom of all of these articles. lethargilistic (talk) 07:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete. – biased and unsourced. --Zac67 (talk) 07:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete. This seems like one editors attempt to add bias into completely unrelated articles. cyberdog958 07:36, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete and warn editor. Editor has been placing it on completely unrelated articles such as paraphilia, which isn’t even a mortal sin per the Catholic Church. Zenomonoz (talk) 08:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete Can you imagine articles clogged up with countless templates about what various religions proscribe with threats of "hellfire and brimstone"? A observant Judaism template (I am Jewish by the way) declaring foods terribly sinful would have to be slapped on Cheeseburger and Bacon and Pork chop and Shrimp and Lobster and Quiche Lorraine and Ham sandwich and Roadkill cuisine and countless other culinary articles and that would lead to other sinful topics like menstruation, composition of fabrics, lending money, elevator wiring schemes, the trimming of sideburns and having fun on Saturdays. When would it end? Cullen328 (talk) 08:52, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete. Agree with Cullen328 (and others). Apart from anything, this would open the floodgates. It's like putting a governmental health warning on all these articles. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 09:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete per Cullen328. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Speedy delete per G4. JJPMaster (she/they) 10:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Old discussions

January 5

Template:French Figure Skating Championships

Following mass redirect of non-notable annual articles only three links. All remaining links currently can be found through the main article. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

So, you first remove (by redirecting) a load of articles without AfD, then empty the template to get that one removed too? That seems to be the standard pattern regarding figure skating templates...The Banner talk 21:51, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
For over ten years, they had no sources to prove notability. That is allowed and has been done on articles for other subjects. You don't always need to go to Afd. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
And did you try to find any sources to rescue the articles? Did you report the lack of sources to any relevant wikiprojects? Or did you just cut them. The Banner talk 14:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Of course I did. There was nothing. WikiProjects don't have to be informed for something like this. Over a decade and no sources. Hardly anybody from the project improved the articles. Taking the articles redirected to Afd would result in all articles ending in the same outcome of redirect or delete. And all Afd's of late for these skating articles have had the same result. No violation is occurring here. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:ETA

Template hasn't been used as a metric since 2008; recommend subst and delete. Primefac (talk) 21:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Nowiki and samp

This template does not appear to have found much need or use, as it is only used a handful of times on talk pages and only once in a template /doc. I could maybe see this being merged into {{samp}} with a |nowiki= parameter or similar, but otherwise I don't see much need to keep this around. Primefac (talk) 20:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

January 1

Template:Infobox US political party

Propose merging Template:Infobox US political party with Template:Infobox political party.
Nothing special with the US version of this template A1Cafel (talk) 07:27, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Support. I originally created a different template because it was different from the current one, but I found a way to code the template so that it can be merged with the current one and change its appearance if one adds a certain piece of code in the source editor.
All that would have to happen for it to be merged is the piece of code which I added being copied over—the pages which currently have the template wouldn’t be affected, as the template would only change it’s appearance if one adds a section for “background”.
If any of this is confusing or if you need me to point out which piece of code it is, please let me know.
Thanks! RiverMan18 (talk) 20:33, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Support. I wasn't even aware US political parties used a different template as they're functionally and visually identical. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 23:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
The template is unused as of right now—I created it before I knew that I could code the template in such a way that it could be merged with the current template. (I’m sorry—I should have done more research before creating the template). RiverMan18 (talk) 00:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
What does your version add to the template? – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 02:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
It adds a parameter which, if it has a value, alters the header of the template. An example can be seen here. RiverMan18 (talk) 02:46, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Then I reiterate my support for the merger. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 08:45, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Would this impact existing infoboxes? Would this introduce the undocumented parameter to regular infoboxes? If not, oppose. ManOfDirt (talk) 00:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
This would only impact the political party infobox and would only result in the parameter being added to that infobox. Adding a value to the parameter would change the way the page name is displayed on the infobox (an example can be seen here). RiverMan18 (talk) 00:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
I would also support merging Template:Infobox Indian political party with Template:Infobox political party, and any other country specific political party infoboxes to our general political party infobox, for conformity. Completely Random Guy (talk) 00:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Support. USA one should be deleted, new parameters should be added to the Political Party Infobox if non-intrusive. More documentation and information on this is needed. Just don't want it intrusively effecting Australian Political Party Infoboxes DirectorDirectorDirector (talk) 11:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 21:05, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Completed discussions

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

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

Categories: