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 no consensus. No other input from other editors. However I have boldly redirected it, with a link back to your rationale here. If it gets reverted then we may have a proper discussion. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:15, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Talk header for guidelines (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redirect to Template:Talk header. The purpose of this template is to be used in place of Template:Talk header on guidelines talk pages as summary instructions for use of the talk page. However, it is only presently used on four such talk pages. I think there are two reasons to consider redirecting this template. Firstly, the differences between this and Template:Talk header are not very substantial and probably do not warrant a more specific template. Secondly, the guidance provided by this template is largely applicable to most project namespace talk pages, and the narrow scope of this template to guidelines talk pages seems ill conceived. If warranted, it may be more suitable to edit Template:Talk header as it appears in the project talk namespace to include the content of this template. Bsherr (talk) 23:51, 3 October 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. @Finnusertop: please consider attribution when you substitute content from another Wikipedia page. I have endeavoured to do that with a dummy edit. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:12, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for commenting after closing, MSGJ, but for the record: I recovered the works list from the history of the article, not the template, so attribution already existed in the history. (I apologize for the confusing wording in the nom that wasn't clear on how I did this). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:16, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Works by Democritus (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox that doesn't navigate anywhere. Was single use but I converted the contents here into a proper embedded list. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:26, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete, Democritus#Works is sufficient. Frietjes (talk) 15:27, 4 October 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. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:09, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Commentdel (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to ((subst:uw-tpv2)) and family.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  22:23, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I agree that this template should be deleted in favor of the equivalent UW-type template. --Bsherr (talk) 23:54, 3 October 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. Seems this one is not needed now. Discussions on how to improve ((Infobox world university ranking)) can take place at Template talk:Infobox world university ranking — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:07, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Infobox technical university ranking (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant template, has been replaced over the years by Template:Infobox world university ranking. Not in use in any articles Aloneinthewild (talk) 17:46, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: it was in use before you removed its instances, for example here [1]. In my opinion this template offers more than the world rankings template since it also reports field-specific rankings. These can be much more relevant for universities specializing in only one field such as Polytechnic University of Milan. If this template is to be deleted, I think these field-specific rankings should be integrated into the world rankings template. --Ita140188 (talk) 09:09, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, true. However, that was the only page it was in use on and one you actively edit. Most of the fields are dated 2010 and we are now on 2018! Keeping these templates up to date is a lot of effort. I can see your sentiment, however there needs to be a line drawn somewhere with how many rankings to display. My view is standardisation is better, any specialised detail can be written in text. We have templates like Template:Infobox Japanese university ranking (By Subject), but I'm not sure we want to repeat that case. Its large and lengthy in detail (and out of date). --Aloneinthewild (talk) 21:27, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We can add the option to include custom lines to display additional rankings. --Ita140188 (talk) 14:31, 5 October 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) 02:14, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:8TeamRR-3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:6TeamRR-3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

not needed after I added an optional standings column to Template:6TeamRR and Template:8TeamRR. Frietjes (talk) 17:22, 3 October 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) 02:14, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:4TeamRR-TennisWide2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

no longer needed after I added optional tie-w/l parameters to Template:4TeamRR-TennisWide. Frietjes (talk) 17:14, 3 October 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) 02:14, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:4TeamRR-TennisWide-B (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

not needed, just use ((N/A)) in the corresponding cells (e.g., this replacement) Frietjes (talk) 17:05, 3 October 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. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:03, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Unicode characters (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused and very unlikely to be used as is far too large for inclusion in any article. Covered in articles in much more manageable chunks, with supporting information and sources: see Category:Unicode blocks. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 12:14, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. I can't imagine how this would ever be used. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:43, 5 October 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. I will close this early as there is unanimous consensus for Template:Alaska state routes to be deleted. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Alaska state routes (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per past precedent at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Precedents#Highway system navboxes. State route navboxes are frowned upon because they are better suited as categories and lists. I understand that Alaska has much fewer numbered highways than the lower 48, but the principle still applies. Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 01:13, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete—not only that, but the list is quite incomplete as the state maintains many highways that aren't given numbers. Imzadi 1979 → 01:27, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Of marginal usefulness, woefully incomplete. And Alaskans never actually use these numbers, preferring names. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:42, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. SounderBruce 02:45, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per previous comments. Other forms of navigation are preferable here. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  23:51, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per above. Categories handle the need. Dough4872 01:38, 5 October 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).