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.

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

Unused and unneeded. Maybe this had a purpose to add logic to parser functions pre-Lua but now would be easily done in Lua if needed. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 14:25, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Redundant to, and slower than, the #ifeq parser function. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:39, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• delete Frietjes (talk) 22:31, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I thought this might be a similar situation to ((qif)) (which was kept around because of its historical importance, and the fact that such template hacks might be needed by older MediaWiki installations), but it isn't. Also, it's trying to do two different jobs at once, which could explain why it's unused. --ais523 12:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

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. Magioladitis (talk) 23:45, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused and unneeded. Maybe this had a purpose to add logic to parser functions pre-Lua but now would be easily done in Lua if needed. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 14:25, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Redundant to, and slower than, the #ifeq parser function. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:38, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• delete Frietjes (talk) 22:31, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I thought this might be a similar situation to ((qif)) (which was kept around because of its historical importance, and the fact that such template hacks might be needed by older MediaWiki installations), but it isn't. Also, it's trying to do two different jobs at once, which could explain why it's unused. --ais523 12:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

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 Magioladitis (talk) 23:45, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused and unneeded. Maybe this had a purpose to add logic to parser functions pre-Lua but now would be easily done in Lua if needed. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 14:24, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Redundant to, and slower than, the #ifexpr parser function. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:38, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• delete Frietjes (talk) 22:31, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I thought this might be a similar situation to ((qif)) (which was kept around because of its historical importance, and the fact that such template hacks might be needed by older MediaWiki installations), but it isn't. Also, it's trying to do two different jobs at once, which could explain why it's unused. --ais523 12:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

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.