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 (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:AVN All Girl (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Underlying award was determined to be non-notable and deleted. In any event, there's no need for a 2-entry template. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 23:05, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Navigation template with only two relevant links. Very little useful navigation. • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as pointless template .–Davey2010^Talk 00:17, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as not useful or meaningful. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:11, 14 September 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 (non-admin closure) Omni Flames (talk) 02:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Infobox fictional creature (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The template, which has only 19 transclusions, is now a wrapper for ((Infobox character)), with no loss of functionality. However, deleting it and replacing instances with the latter template will make more parameters available, as requested on this template's talk page. The nominated template's two unique parameters, |official title= and |classification=, could be added to the other template, rather than using its free parameters. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:21, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Eight and a half years ago. Terrifying. Anyway, no objections: Wikipedia has somehow matured beyond the need for this. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 19:41, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, and for 19 transclusions I would not add the unique parameters to ((Infobox character)). That info can be presented with other parameters or the custom fields.— TAnthony^Talk 21:22, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

|official title= seems to be rarely used (and can be accommodated by |alias= or a custom field), and the contents of |classification= can go to |species= or a custom field. I'd volunteer to complete the conversions when this goes through.— TAnthony^Talk 21:30, 19 September 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 Relisted on 2016 September 22 (non-admin closure) Omni Flames (talk) 02:00, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:D1 Grand Prix (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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 (non-admin closure) Omni Flames (talk) 02:01, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Dance Showdown (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No cast and crew in navboxes. Fails WP:PERFNAV Rob Sinden (talk) 13:01, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:PERFNAV. anemoneprojectors 11:08, 19 September 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 (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 01:33, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Stand Up for the Week (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

As per "no cast and crew in navboxes" consensus, I am nominating this template for deletion as it is only populated by cast members. 6ii9 (talk) 12:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per longstanding consensus and per WP:PERFNAV. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:53, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:PERFNAV. anemoneprojectors 11:08, 19 September 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 (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 01:33, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Bailando (Slovakia) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No article, no links. Rob Sinden (talk) 11:44, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: no links apart from related series. 6ii9 (talk) 15:44, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per 6ii9....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:40, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- no useful for navigation. The article either does not exist or was deleted. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:10, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, no navigation. anemoneprojectors 11:08, 19 September 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).