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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:32, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Netflix films and documentaries (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is absurdly large and vague. As Netflix begins to create more films, it will become larger. There's a reason List of Warner Bros. films has no corresponding template (I think). Just too big. Even Template:Warner Bros. animation and comics is huge by itself. Perhaps a split Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 23:48, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• • Proposal: Split into three smaller infoboxes: current films, current documentaries, and upcoming
  • Proposal 2: Break it down further by year. "2015 Netflix films," "2016 Netflix documentaries" ... Boycool (talk) 02:13, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Large, unwieldy and will only ever get larger and unwieldly-er. I can't imagine we ever do this for any other film studio. Categories handle this job better. -- Netoholic @ 09:49, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Netoholic. Seems to be a bit of WP:RECENTISM to have this for Netflix, and isn't something we should have for films by studio. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:51, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a template. This info works better as a list article and/or a category. MarnetteD|Talk 14:03, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Just because the films were made by Netflix doesn't give the films close association that one would expect to use a navbox template to follow to related topics. --Masem (t) 14:50, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:NAVBOX. If the template did not exist the bulk of the links would not be added to the "see also" sections of the other articles, therefore a list or category would be more appropriate. Betty Logan (talk) 17:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Split into 3 templates (documentaries, films, upcoming films). Landingdude13 (talk) 23:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Split into templates is good. 24.143.241.27 (talk) 01:48, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wouldn't splits still be WP:RECENTISM? We don't have corresponding templates for other movie studios, and this will only get larger and unwieldier. As said before, categories do the job just fine. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:32, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete List or category would be more suitable. —Joeyconnick (talk) 23:17, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:CLT since templates become less useful with too many links, and it seems fair that this set of films will only continue to grow. It seems better to have a category and/or a list of these films (that can be linked to in a "See also" section or a very high-level template). Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:28, 3 May 2018 (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 2018 May 5. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:21, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Module:Plain_text (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 relisted on 2018 May 5. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:20, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:L-abbr (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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:31, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:2009 ICC World Cup Qualifier (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Un-used an pointless template. We don't have any similar ones for teams that simply qualify for a qualifier tournament. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:11, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as unnecessary. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - how many templates do we want on the bottom of every page? If we use this one then there's a bunch of wiki pages which will have more content in the templates than they will have in the actual article. Make it go away. Please. Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:55, 2 May 2018 (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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:30, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• 2,424 templates, full list at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 April 27/Fb competition TfD (Given the number of templates and length it takes to display, I listed the templates on a separate page in order to save resources)

Old, outdated and deprecated template system. There is a long-standing consensus that templates are not meant to replace plain wikilinks. There is also consensus on WT:FOOTY and past TfDs is they system should be discontinued and replaced in order to follow better practices/newer styles. These templates should be replaced with simple wikilinks. (Note: This discussion is to determine a consensus to eliminate the use of the templates. The templates would first be substituted before actually being deleted.) S.A. Julio (talk) 09:32, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give a link to the long-standing consensus referred to? Keith D (talk) 11:39, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Keith D: Using templates for wikilinks goes against the template namespace guidelines ("templates should not normally be used to store article text, as this makes it more difficult to edit the content"). S.A. Julio (talk) 21:09, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@S.A. Julio: Thanks may be useful for other templates that complicate things by just constructing a wikilink such as ((Stnlnk)). Keith D (talk) 21:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 09:32, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - not needed. GiantSnowman 11:30, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 13:04, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Should have been deleted years ago. They seem to be nothing more than wikilinks in a template, which is a complete waste of everyone's time. — This, that and the other (talk) 13:44, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete . A pity useless template and should have been nominated for deletion earlier. Abishe (talk) 15:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I'm struggling to understand why over 2000 of these templates were created in the first place given that they literally just contain a wikilink that's often shorter than the template invocation! Richard⁰⁶¹² 00:00, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no need, can be replaced by plain style. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 09:18, 28 April 2018 (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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:19, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:2008–09 CONCACAF Champions League (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2009–10 CONCACAF Champions League (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2010–11 CONCACAF Champions League (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2011–12 CONCACAF Champions League (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No need. See also WT:FOOTY Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 08:43, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 09:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - not needed. GiantSnowman 09:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unnecessary. S.A. Julio (talk) 09:13, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 12:59, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not needed. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2018 (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).