< November 1	November 3 >

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:42, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BISCAST (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

too few working links. Frietjes (talk) 20:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

userfy pending creation of the necessary articles. --NSH002 (talk) 22:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:43, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Grant Nicholas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

too few working links and partially duplicates Template:Feeder. Frietjes (talk) 20:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:46, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sboff (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template with no clear usage. SFB 18:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete, duplicates ((suboff)). Frietjes (talk) 15:55, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:47, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sbin (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template with no clear usage. SFB 18:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete, duplicates ((subon)). Frietjes (talk) 15:55, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:47, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ThreeLeg start (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I have now modified Template:TwoLeg start to allow up to four legs and updated the relevant articles. This template is no longer required. SFB 17:09, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete, and possibly rename Template:TwoLeg start as multileg start or something. Frietjes (talk) 15:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:48, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FourLeg start (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I have now modified Template:TwoLeg start to allow for up to four legs and updated the relevant pages. Template no longer required. SFB 17:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete, and possibly rename Template:TwoLeg start as multileg start or something. Frietjes (talk) 15:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was merge Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:48, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Earlysportsyearcat (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Sportsyearcat (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Earlysportsyearcat with Template:Sportsyearcat.
The sole difference between between the early template and the normal one is that the early one does not include a link to the main article for the category. However, the article base has since been expanded so articles like 1808 in sports now exist. There is no reason to retain the early template now and the normal one can be used. SFB 16:02, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

merge, the only difference is the inclusion of the ((main)) link, which can be determined with a simple ifexist. Frietjes (talk) 15:58, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- now fixed, so the earlysportsyearcat can be redirected to Sportsyearcat without any problems. Frietjes (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:50, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Championshiptitle2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Simplistic succession template that is superfluous to Template:Succession box. SFB 15:55, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 16:18, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:50, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Championshiptitle (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Simplistic succession template that is superfluous to Template:Succession box. SFB 15:41, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak delete as it is apparently unused. If it was used, I'd say keep as a wrapper template. — ((U|Technical 13)) ^{(e • t • c)} 15:50, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete, not used or needed. Frietjes (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:51, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Athl iocc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Replaced by Template:Flagathlete. It is common practice in sports lists that where it is appropriate to list the team three-letter-code (e.g. ESP for Spain) that the person is representing, it is appropriate to show the flag also. This template was in use on a handful of biathlon articles, which I have now updated to the standard flagathlete template. SFB 14:35, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 16:22, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:52, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rank3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template - ((Bronze03)) would be a better option in terms of the presentation anyway. SFB 14:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 16:23, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:52, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rank2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template - ((Silver02)) would be a better option in terms of the presentation anyway. SFB 14:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 16:23, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:53, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rank1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template - ((Gold01)) would be a better option in terms of the presentation anyway. SFB 14:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 16:24, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:European Silver medal (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template - ((Silver02)) would be a better option in terms of the presentation anyway. SFB 13:57, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant. Bazj (talk) 13:59, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete, not needed. Frietjes (talk) 15:22, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:European Bronze medal (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template - ((Bronze03)) would be a better option in terms of the presentation anyway. SFB 13:56, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant. Bazj (talk) 14:00, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete, not needed. Frietjes (talk) 15:22, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:European Gold medal (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template - ((Gold01)) would be a better option in terms of the presentation anyway. SFB 13:55, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant. Bazj (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete Frietjes (talk) 16:24, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:59, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:World Gold medal (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template - ((Gold01)) would be a better option in terms of the presentation anyway. SFB 13:51, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - there's still a live transclusion. Bazj (talk) 13:59, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete Frietjes (talk) 16:24, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:59, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:World Silver medal (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template - ((Silver02)) would be a better option in terms of the presentation anyway. SFB 13:51, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant. Bazj (talk) 13:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete Frietjes (talk) 16:36, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:59, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:World Bronze medal (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template - ((Bronze03)) would be a better option in terms of the presentation anyway. SFB 13:51, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant. Bazj (talk) 13:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete Frietjes (talk) 16:36, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted by Patrick (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Single-column table row (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is unused (apart from in its own documentation). — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 13:46, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant. Bazj (talk) 13:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it is heavily used as part of Template:Do for every Dutch municipality as a set listed on User talk:Patrick/data Netherlands. Like I said on the ((Do for every Dutch municipality)), please check with Patrick and see if he is even pursuing this line of templates anymore. If not, you can delete the whole set as CSD:G7. — ((U|Technical 13)) ^{(e • t • c)} 15:41, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's only being linked from there, not transcluded... — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was boldly userfied by Patrick. --ais523 22:44, 6 November 2014 (U T C)

Template:Do for every Dutch municipality (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is only used in two userspace pages and in one template documentation page, and this kind of template is now obsolete now that we have the ability to write proper for loops using Lua. If this was transcluded more I would convert it to Lua like I did with Module:ForLoop, but as it's not really being used I think it would be better to just delete it. (Also, it is making the transcluding page show up in Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls, which is how I got to know about it.) — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 13:37, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant. Bazj (talk) 13:53, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It seems to be something that is being created or worked on by Patrick. There hasn't been activity on the user page sandbox for awhile. Mr. Stradivarius, have you asked Patrick what his goal is with the template and if he still needs it? Perhaps he has 40 or 50 pages he plans to use it on and and still working out kinks or bugs. Perhaps he just got discouraged on April 1, 2013‎, but he intends to go back to it when he gets his templating legs back under him. Perhaps he decided it just can't be done via template, and doesn't realize it might be doable now in Lua? Let's not be too hasty with such a complex work in progress. — ((U|Technical 13)) ^{(e • t • c)} 15:35, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If something like this is needed, it's trivial to do it in Lua, and I'll be happy to put the code together myself. If I was going to do something like this in Lua, though, the only part of the current template code that I would need is the list of Dutch municipalities. The module would probably be called something like Module:Dutch population, and the entire population table would be created inside the module, using a for loop to iterate over every municipality in a list of municipalities. There would be no need for a do-this-for-every-table-row kind of template. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:55, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as outdated, it was used on Table of municipalities of the Netherlands which has since been merged into List of municipalities of the Netherlands, before the list was improved to FL status. CRwikiCA talk 17:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Succession (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

WP:SBS/T Redundant template. All transclusions have been subst'ed. Bazj (talk) 13:06, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What is this template redundant to? What template does it mirror? If you can tell us which one, it would be eligible for CSD:T3. Subst:ing all the uses before the conclusion of a TfD is bad form in my opinion because it appears that you are trying to hide a significant enough usage to justify a deletionist agenda. — ((U|Technical 13)) ^{(e • t • c)} 15:21, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's no longer eligible for T3. It was tagged for a T3 deletion but Oiyarbepsy removed the tag because people have discussed the page or because it used to be widely transcluded or because I'd taken it to CSD rather than TfD, take your pick. The template was subst'ed away as a matter of housekeeping, not of hiding anything. Had the T3 gone through (as it should, having waited the prescribed 7 days) it would never have come to TfD.

I'd like to know in what way I've hidden anything. Every edit, every subst, every nomination has been tagged WP:SBS/T, linking quite clearly to the WikiProject Succession Box Standardization and its "agenda".

I'm not a deletionist, I'm just putting in the hours on the donkey work to carry out a longstanding policy and trying to tidy away non-standard, deprecated succession boxes and unneccessary redirects to them. Bazj (talk) 21:37, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's apparently been deprecated since around 2007 or so, replaced by ((s-start)) or ((Succession box)). Even considering this, thought, it should probably be redirected to one of those, so no deletion is required or warranted. The question is which template to redirect to. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 17:02, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. @Technical 13: that's really unfair and you should withdraw that comment. I myself marked this template as historical in 2007 and it's been calling ((s-start)) and a set of related templates since 2005. It's had no independent existence for nine years. Speedy deletion was declined on the grounds of historical importance. I suppose if someone wanted to research the history of succession templates on Wikipedia then that's true, but ((PeerNavbox)) was pretty important too and it was deleted without dissension six years ago. I think it can go. Mackensen (talk) 18:17, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete, or move somewhere and mark historical. Frietjes (talk) 16:40, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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