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. Calling Codename Lisa Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:42, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox W3C standard (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) (14 transclusions)

Template:Infobox technology standard (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) (33 transclusions)

Propose merging Template:Infobox W3C standard with Template:Infobox technology standard.
Similar templates. No need for a specific W3C variant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:47, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Add the 3 fields that are missing and merge. It seems like a no-brainer. Why couldn't this have been discussed last time? Now it'll be at least another week that the TfD banner will 'adorn' these infoboxes. Alakzi (talk) 01:49, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. (The previous discussion was convoluted.) —PC-XT+ 20:14, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: See also proposal to merge Infobox SBTVD standard. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:49, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge. Looks like there is enough similarity and the merger is simple enough. Actually, call me and I will carry out the merger, so that it is not added to the backlog for long. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 07:45, 12 February 2015 (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 as not useful to aid navigation Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:35, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Derby County F.C. captains (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Original research... JMHamo (talk) 23:00, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 23:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - having a template for association football club captains is overkill. GiantSnowman 08:41, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per JMHamo and the Snowman's rationales. Not having team captain navboxes for association football is completely consistent with the standard practices of other major sports WikiProjects, including those for American college sports, MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL, WNBA, etc. Most sports do not lack for player navboxes, and navboxes for minor honors such as this contribute to the ridiculous accumulation of the bottom-of-the-page cruft common to many sports. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per above, plus we don't know whether this refers to club captains (the ceremonial position given to one of the club's senior players) or team captains (the player who wears the armband each game). These are often the same person, but the latter often varies when the former is injured or otherwise unavailable. Hence, there can be many more team captains than club captains. Either way, we don't know which this template refers to. – PeeJay 17:03, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - being the captain of a team simply isn't a significant thing IMO. Unlike managers, who shape a club's history, captain really have very little actual responsibility or authority and being one is not a defining character of the vast majority of players who have captained a team -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:34, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - per Pee Jay , an inherently confusing template and therefore not a useful aid to navigation. For what it's worth even if the template was clarified to the more restrictive category of club captain I don't think this would be notable enough to justify a template. Fenix down (talk) 21:24, 8 February 2015 (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 as redundant Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:32, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Start pre (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:End pre (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

another pointless pair of templates. author under edit restrictions. Frietjes (talk) 17:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment shouldn't all HTML elements be wrapped into templates, so that HTML is absent from wikis (the purpose of Wikis is to avoid HTML?) so that they can be adjusted for sitewide adaptation? -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 07:13, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • good luck with that, and see this discussion and this discussion. Frietjes (talk) 16:29, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as redundant, as it requires HTML knowledge to use, so we might as well use HTML, if there aren't other templates for the specific purpose. —PC-XT+ 20:22, 8 February 2015 (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 as unused duplicate Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:30, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikipedia:CHERUB/Update (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template JMHamo (talk) 03:13, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: There's another version at Wikipedia:WikiProject Children's literature/CHERUB and Henderson's Boys task force/Outreach/Updates, which is used. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:47, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as duplicate. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:09, 15 February 2015 (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 subst and delete as templates storing article text Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:21, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IOS 4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:IOS 5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:IOS 6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:IOS 7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:IOS 8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

• Subst and delete - templates should be deleted and merged with the History of iOS or their parent articles as per Wikipedia:Template_namespace#Guidelines (first dot point: Templates should not normally be used to store article text). NeoGeneric (talk) 02:46, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Subst and delete article content hiding in a template. Just because it is tabular does not make it appropriate to hide content away in a table. Low or single transclusion counts all around. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:50, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Subst and delete - per guidelines and recent discussions on similar templates. Further discussions beyond this TfD on article talkpages could address the redundant level of detail in 2 separate article versions (see WP:SUMMARY). GermanJoe (talk) 15:30, 13 February 2015 (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 as unused and unneeded Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:19, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused Bgwhite (talk) 00:10, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• delete Frietjes (talk) 16:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unused and redundant. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:05, 15 February 2015 (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.