< November 22	November 24 >

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).

The result of the discussion was withdrawn (non-admin closure) Frietjes (talk) 14:29, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tank battles (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused Frietjes (talk) 21:35, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Frietjes: Nope; WP:TANKS uses it. ^∞ Target360YT ^∞ (talk · contribs) 11:59, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Target360YT, check Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Tank_battles, zero transclusions at the time of this post. Frietjes (talk) 13:23, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Frietjes: I see one transclusion. I have never implemented the template into articles because I started being busy and stressed about the time when I created it. If you wish, I could implement it, although it would be quite incovenient. ^∞ Target360YT ^∞ (talk · contribs) 13:39, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Target360YT, the one transclusion is "User:Pppery/noinclude list" which transcludes all templates at TfD. so, there are zero actual transclusions. no need to do anything that would be inconvenient, we can just delete it instead. Frietjes (talk) 13:48, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Frietjes: Yeah, implementing the template now. Doesn't need to be deleted. Furthermore, the WikiProject needs it. Need some code help though. Can't get the "style=wide" parameter to work. Mind helping? ^∞ Target360YT ^∞ (talk · contribs) 14:05, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nvm, got the code working. Forgot to insert the (({style|))} parameter. ^∞ Target360YT ^∞ (talk · contribs) 14:09, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Target360YT, how do you decide what is included in the list of "Major tank battles that changed the world"? do you have a source for that, or is it just all tank battles with articles? Frietjes (talk) 14:11, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Frietjes: Well, all tank battle articles mentioning "major", "important", or "first" (i.e., first tank battle) should be included. I should removed the "that changed the world" text because it's quite opinion based, no? ^∞ Target360YT ^∞ (talk · contribs) 14:14, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Target360YT, yes, you should avoid WP:OR/WP:POV, and have a way of generating the list that doesn't require OR/POV. Frietjes (talk) 14:15, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Frietjes: Okay. Will remove the OR thing after adding the template to the articles mentioned. At least the template name ain't "Template:Tank battles that changed the world". ^∞ Target360YT ^∞ (talk · contribs) 14:17, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Frietjes: Okay sir, I already changed the title of the template to "Major tank battles". Also implemented the template onto articles. Cleared of WP:POV yet? ^∞ Target360YT ^∞ (talk · contribs) 14:24, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Target360YT, I will close this discussion, but it would seem the least POV way of filling it would be to add everything from Category:Tank battles. a tank battle with an article is notable, otherwise it that article should be deleted. Frietjes (talk) 14:28, 25 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused and blanked Frietjes (talk) 21:34, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. --NSH002 (talk) 09:39, 24 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused Frietjes (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete as unused; pointless template as only one link, the rest are redirects to that same page. --NSH002 (talk) 21:48, 26 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tempo series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

all the links go to the same article Frietjes (talk) 21:27, 23 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Texas Stealth roster (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and no obvious parent article Frietjes (talk) 21:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom --NSH002 (talk) 09:38, 24 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was widthdrawn Frietjes (talk) 18:36, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

((S-line/KSR left/Amrokkang Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Angol Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Changjin Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Changsang Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Changsongang Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Changyon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Chedong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Chiktong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Chongdo Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Chongdu Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Chonghwaryok Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Chongjinhang Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Chongnyon Parwon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Chonsong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Choyang Colliery Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Hochon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Hoeam Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Hoedun Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Hyongbong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Iltan Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ingpo Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Kaechon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Kangdok Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Kanggye Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Kobi Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Kogonwon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Kowon Tangwang Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Kumgangsan Chongnyon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Kuunbong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Kwanha Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Kŭndong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Maebon Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Mandok Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Manpo Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Mapyong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Myongdang Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Myonghak Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Namdong Branch (Sohae_Line)))
((S-line/KSR left/Paechon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Pochon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Pongchon Colliery Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Pungang Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Pungnam Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Pupo Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Rajinhang Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ryangmak Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ryongam Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ryongdae Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ryonghung Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ryongjong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ryongmun Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ryongsong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ryongsong Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Ryongui Loop))
((S-line/KSR left/Samchonpo Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Samjiyon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Sechon Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Sinhung Line (ng)))
((S-line/KSR left/Sinhung Line (sg)))
((S-line/KSR left/Sinmyongchon Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Sinsong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Sochan Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Sohaekammun Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Soho Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Soksan Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Solgol Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Songpyong Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Sungri Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Supung Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Taean Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Taegak Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Taegon Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Taegwal-li Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Taehyang Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Taeri Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Tokhyon Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Toksan Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Toksong Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Toktal Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Tongchon Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Tongnam Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Tongpo Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Tuon Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ullyul Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Unha Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Unsan Line))
((S-line/KSR left/Vinalon Branch))
((S-line/KSR left/Ŭnsan Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Amrokkang Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Angol Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Changjin Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Changsang Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Changsongang Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Changyon Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Chedong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Chiktong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Chongdo Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Chongdu Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Chonghwaryok Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Chongnyon Parwon Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Chonsong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Choyang Colliery Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Hochon Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Hoeam Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Hoedun Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Hoeryŏng T'an'gwang Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Hwanghae Chongnyon Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Hyongbong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Iltan Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ingpo Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Kangdok Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Kanggye Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Kobi Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Kogonwon Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Kowon Tangwang Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Kuunbong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Kwanha Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Kŭndong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Maebon Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Mandok Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Manpo Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Mapyong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Myongdang Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Myonghak Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Namdong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Namdong Branch (Sohae_Line)))
((S-line/KSR right/Ongjin Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Paechon Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Pochon Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Pongchon Colliery Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Pukpu Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Pungang Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Pungnam Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Pupo Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Pyongbuk Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryangmak Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryongam Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryongdae Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryonggang Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryonghung Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryongjong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryongmun Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryongsong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryongsong Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Ryongui Loop))
((S-line/KSR right/Samchonpo Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Samjiyon Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Sechon Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Sinhung Line (ng)))
((S-line/KSR right/Sinhung Line (sg)))
((S-line/KSR right/Sinmyongchon Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Sinsong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Sochan Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Sohae Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Soho Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Soksan Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Solgol Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Songpyong Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Songrim Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Sungri Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Supung Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Taegak Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Taegon Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Taegwal-li Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Taehyang Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Taeri Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Tasado Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Toksan Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Toksong Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Toktal Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Tongnam Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Tongpo Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Tuon Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ullyul Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Unha Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Unsan Line))
((S-line/KSR right/Vinalon Branch))
((S-line/KSR right/Ŭnsan Line))

unused Frietjes (talk) 20:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Though not used yet, they *will* be used, as the pages where they'll be used get updated with their infoboxes. 2Q (talk) 06:02, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2Q, it's been a year. should I check again next year? Frietjes (talk) 13:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know it's been a long while, but I haven't given up on it - I just got distracted with other DPRK railway subjects "oh hey this needs written too!" and then boom. But yes, I'll get onto this! 2Q (talk) 14:46, 24 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:04, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused Frietjes (talk) 20:50, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom --NSH002 (talk) 21:51, 26 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Ultimate Fighter Smashes (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

all WP:PERFNAV, Template:The Ultimate Fighter covers the core season/winner links. Frietjes (talk) 19:52, 23 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Ultimate Fighter seasons (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

all WP:PERFNAV, Template:The Ultimate Fighter covers the core season/winner links. Frietjes (talk) 19:51, 23 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:14, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Ultimate Fighter Brazil (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

all WP:PERFNAV, Template:The Ultimate Fighter covers the core season/winner links. Frietjes (talk) 19:51, 23 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:06, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Ultimate Fighter 1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 9 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 10 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 11 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 12 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 13 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 14 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 15 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:The Ultimate Fighter 16 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

all WP:PERFNAV, Template:The Ultimate Fighter covers the core season/winner links. Frietjes (talk) 19:48, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete all per nom. --NSH002 (talk) 09:41, 24 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:11, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Ultimate Fighter 17 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused WP:PERFNAV box Frietjes (talk) 15:30, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. --NSH002 (talk) 09:43, 24 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:15, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Superman/Batman Adventures (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and duplicates other navboxes Frietjes (talk) 15:29, 23 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:16, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Seven Deadly Sins (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and bad for accessibility due to the WP:LISTGAPs Frietjes (talk) 15:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. --NSH002 (talk) 09:46, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
delete per nom. Mostly empty and thus useless for navigation. Dimadick (talk) 23:27, 29 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:17, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Rolling Stones lineups (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and duplicates The_Rolling_Stones#Band_members Frietjes (talk) 15:27, 23 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Middle Episodes (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

all redlinks and redirects, for season navigation, we have Template:The Middle Frietjes (talk) 15:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. --NSH002 (talk) 09:54, 24 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Keep ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Magic Flute (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and rejected the day it was included Frietjes (talk) 15:23, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The template may be viewed as a pop culture bog by some at WP:OPERA, but WP is a pop culture dominated resource and the value of the template to WP:MEDIAF and WP:FILM make it worthwhile. It is highly inconsistent with MEDIAF style to remove such templates because of the existence of an overlapping category. Additionally, As I was creating these templates for a broad array of operas, I kept the WP:OPERA project in the loop.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:10, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- N.B.: I have reverted the removals as inconsistent with WP:MEDIAF style to dump tempaltes for overlapping categories.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:21, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Could Opus33 please come and explain why Multimedia franchises should eliminate templates in favor of categories.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:52, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We have other such templates linking cross-media topics, e.g. Template:Figaro Trilogy, this one seems fine to me.--Smerus (talk) 19:34, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Could Frietjes care to explain what do you mean by "unused and rejected the day it was included?" In my opinion, the template is useful and it has been there since 2012. --Jay (talk) 17:31, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- User:Whjayg, did you click on the link or not? Frietjes (talk) 17:32, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Whjayg, Over time (some in 2012 and some much more recently) Opus33 had removed the template from all of its uses under the belief that if there is a Category:Works based on The Magic Flute, this template should be removed. I reverted all of those edits.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:01, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the explanation, Frietjes and Tony. However as I said earlier, I believe the template is useful and should be kept. --Jay (talk) 20:15, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Honestly, I need Opus33 to pop in here to resolve some things, since I think he has been removing cross media templates in many other uses.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:21, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
N.B. At User_talk:Opus33#Template:Adam_and_Eve, Opus33 called my attention to this edit. I believed that readers interested in the subject matter of The Creation (Haydn) would consider Template:Adam and Eve to be a useful navbox. Seeing The Magic Flute edits which had a broad array of edit summaries and his comments regarding Adam and Eve, I need Opus33 to comment here before I have to start digging through his past contributions to find other inappropriate template removals.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming Tony will, as they say, Assume Good Faith, as I do, I can tell him that I think templates are redundant (in light of the category system), are visually ugly, emphasize trivia, and (above all) totally wreck the wonderful utility What Links Here, which, before people started putting in those templates, was a great way to browse Wikipedia. I haven't made up my mind whether to edit-war on these, but I feel pretty firm that they hurt article quality and ought to go. Yours sincerely, Opus33 (talk) 19:47, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. so you are against WP:NAVBOXes. Is it possible to summarize the templates that you have removed entirely like The Magic Flute, so I can get an understanding of what is going on. In terms of edit warring, I don't think an individual should make the decision that they don't like NAVBOXes. I think in the area of WP:MEDIAF and similar crossmedia templates, it is wrong for an individual to decide to run around undoing work.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:22, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well really now, Tony -- you certainly didn't consult with other editors when you invented and installed the template. Opus33 (talk) 22:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At the time of creation, from the perspective of WP:OPERA, their was no consensus in discussion. At that time, GuillaumeTell and Michael Bednarek were against the templates, while Kosboot supported and Voceditenore stated that the deployment should be subject to expert scrutiny. A few months later, the main debate was whether the templates should appear on the composer's page per this discussion. I believe that the implication was that they have some use, but not on composer pages. I did not restore this template to Mozart. I recall no discussion of these at WP:MEDIAF, where I presume they would have had more support.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That latter discussion also included input from Almost-instinct, Smerus, and Gerda Arendt, who may also have an opinion on the matter here.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:46, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Templates like these (Opera navboxes) are not WP:NAVBOXes in the sense that Operas by composer templates, Music awards templates, or Film director navigational boxes are. The latter provide links to a well defined and comprehensible list of items with unambiguous inclusion criteria. The former border on WP:OR, WP:SYNTH and WP:ESSAY, and, in extreme cases (Template:Faust with >150 entries), have no navigational value. E. g., why is "Åh Amadeus" included here but Mozart and Freemasonry isn't? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:54, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I have no problem with Mozart and Freemasonry being included and have added it.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:04, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, if nothing else because it is useful in articles for non-operatic works based on Mozart's The Magic Flute and it should not have been summarily removed from those. I honestly don't follow the argument for a template like that "hurting article quality" because they are "visually ugly" —simply use the collapse option if you don't like it. The argument that it is redundant to the category system is flawed. They are two different ways of finding related articles—not mutually exclusive. The average reader, as opposed to a regular Wikipedia editor, is unlikely to use the category system. Category:The Magic Flute has had on average 3 views a day in the last 90 days (the article itself had an average of 1,164 views a day). And frankly, many category structures are opaque, inconsistent, and misleading. They also assume that the reader already knows what they're looking for by being overly specified into subcategories. And how on earth do these templates "totally wreck the wonderful utility What Links Here"? Again, that's a utility used more by editors than readers. We are writing for our readers not ourselves. Here's the list of articles linking to The Magic Flute produced by "What links here". Note that I've set the list to hide the transclusions from templates but it still contains well over 1500 articles. How is that a "wonderful utility" for finding key related articles quickly? This is not say that some of these templates don't need to be monitored for accuracy and amended where necessary, but it's not a reason to delete or remove them wholesale. Voceditenore (talk) 12:39, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have now edited this template for accuracy [1], [2], and [3]. Voceditenore (talk) 10:55, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Templates such as this are more useful than categories for navigation. Any reader can get an overview of a subject and its impact at a glance. Great encyclopedic value. And most of them are visually appealing. Dimadick (talk) 23:25, 29 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by GB fan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:15, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Lily Bard Mysteries (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

basically all red links Frietjes (talk) 15:19, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- WOSlinker (talk) 17:06, 23 November 2016 (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).

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TheBus route info (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete seems useless. CapitalSasha ~ talk 01:34, 24 November 2016 (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).

November 23

Template:Tank battles

Template:Teachers

Template:TemplateSystemSeries

Template:Tempo series

Template:Texas Stealth roster

Unused S-line/KSR_left and S-line/KSR_right

Template:TextT

Template:The Ultimate Fighter Smashes

Template:The Ultimate Fighter seasons

Template:The Ultimate Fighter Brazil

Template:The Ultimate Fighter 1

Template:The Ultimate Fighter 17

Template:The Superman/Batman Adventures

Template:The Seven Deadly Sins

Template:The Rolling Stones lineups

Template:The Middle Episodes

Template:The Magic Flute

Template:The Lily Bard Mysteries

Template:TheBus route info