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 merge to Template:Ontario Provincial Highways. Templates have been converted to wrappers for Template:Ontario Provincial Highways. There is no consensus for deletion of these templates and some are highly used. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:39, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Ontario Tertiary and 7000 Highways (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Ontario Secondary Highways (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Ontario King's Highways (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Should be replaced by Template:Ontario Provincial Highways. Makes more sense to have all Ontario provincial highways in one navbox. – BrandonXLF ^(t@lk) 23:47, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: I merged these three related template discussions. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:34, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - the new template is better. Whether that means these templates should be redirected to the new one for reverse compatibility or deleted and replaced, I'm not sure. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:34, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Administrative note if the result is "support merge" then these templates must be redirected with attribution, because it is fairly clear that they were directly copied (see Special:PermaLink/862068099). In fact,BrandonXLF, you should well know by now that copying without attribution is a serious issue on Wikipedia, and you should provide the correct attribution as soon as possible. Primefac (talk) 14:03, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't know that included templates. I'll add it right now. – BrandonXLF ^(t@lk) 19:43, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose—new template is just too large. To be honest, I'd suggest all of them be deleted as duplicative of the appropriate categories and list articles, but barring that, the individual navboxes by type/classification are a better arrangement than putting everything together. Imzadi 1979 → 23:48, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • We can have the separate navboxes in one navbox maybe. We could also have collapsible sub-navboxes. – BrandonXLF ^(t@lk) 07:29, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose in its current form - it is indeed too large. I suggest to do something similar to Template:Subdivisions of New Brunswick, where only the appropriate group is shown if selected. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Support merge. No issues with this new template. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:42, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Update to template - @P199 and Imzadi1979: How do these new changes look? – BrandonXLF ^(t@lk) 02:26, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still oppose merger and in favor of outright deletion of all of them here. Imzadi 1979 → 04:30, 12 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) 20:45, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Kyrgyzstan NFT results (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused; and only links one article. Frietjes (talk) 22:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom unless we extended in the future Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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) 00:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Ahja Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Alatskivi Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Aseri Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Kõo Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Kõpu Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Laheda Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Meremäe Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Mikitamäe Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Mooste Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Pajusi Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Pala Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Puurmani Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Sangaste Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Suure-Jaani Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Tabivere Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No longer a municipality; villages are now in other parishes (e.g., Põlva Parish) Frietjes (talk) 21:49, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, no purpose of keepeng those templates since they're not used in any article anymore. 8 years ago they really had a purpose. Flying Saucer (talk) 18:43, 11 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 keep. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:02, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:PH electorate (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Usage of Wikidata is not allowed in article text per Wikipedia:Wikidata#Appropriate usage in articles. This template is foundationally based on such a feature. ((3x|p))ery (talk) 18:54, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep 49.145.130.131 (talk) 09:36, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:JUSTAVOTE ((3x|p))ery (talk) 18:59, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. The link above is not policy. And I am a proponent of more integration of Wikidata, not less. Furthermore, I wouldn't want the text to disappear altogether if this template is deleted outright. But if it were substituted, I could live with that (hence "weak keep"). -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:38, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  I was never actually planning to delete the text, only to subst it. ((3x|p))ery (talk) 11:30, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Still, once the electorate changes, it needs to be updated in 2 places: WP and Wikidata (instead of just on Wikidata). I don't see why we shouldn't link to Wikidata... -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. It is indeed much better if statistical data like this is only maintained in one location, and that is Wikidata, to facilitate easier updating. But I would prefer it if the template is able to reject the Wikidata value if there are no references (in Wikidata), and to pull in the reference from Wikidata as an inline citation into the template. As noted, Wikipedia:Wikidata is not policy and so usage of Wikidata should be discussed on a case-by-case basis. —seav (talk) 03:01, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: User:Exec8 has been actively removing this template from articles, but no reason is given in the edit summary why he is doing this (maybe to influence the outcome of this discussion???). -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:48, 15 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 no consensus. I suggest an RfC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television to help determine consensus on this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:06, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:ABC Kansas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:CBS Kansas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Fox Kansas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:NBC Kansas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:CW Kansas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:MNTV Kansas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:PBS Kansas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Other Kansas Stations (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:TV Stations Kansas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:ABC Kansas, Template:CBS Kansas, Template:Fox Kansas, Template:NBC Kansas, Template:CW Kansas, Template:MNTV Kansas, Template:PBS Kansas and Template:Other Kansas Stations with Template:TV Stations Kansas.
To be inline with TV templates from other small states. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:22, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. —Mythdon 09:02, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'm just wondering why all the mid/small size states are getting merged into one template like this? It doesn't make sense to me to cherry pick states to merge into a single template based on size. For example I just looked at the entire state of New York and all those templates can be consolidated down to one as well. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 09:37, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I was about to support as it seemed pretty straight forward, but I gave it another look. Why should those templates be together? Because they are all TV stations from Kansas? Merging them doesn't seem like it fits the criteria placed in WP:NAVBOX (specifically, #1, #2, #3 and #5). --Gonnym (talk) 19:59, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Those templates should probably be together because it may be easier to navigate than with separate templates for each network affiliation and in the event a particular station changes its network affiliation it would either not require any edits or require less edits to those particular articles as the same template would apply to all TV stations from Kansas and other states 64222368Z260O (talk) 22:39, 10 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) 00:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:2018 Asian Games men's sepak takraw regu game BM (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

as far as I can tell, there was no bronze medal match (source) Frietjes (talk) 15:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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 redirect to Template:Cabinet of Tanzania. Revisions of the two templates overlap, so a history merge will be problematic. Probably simpler just to redirect it. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Current Tanzania Cabinet (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

duplicates Template:Cabinet of Tanzania; could be history merged Frietjes (talk) 15:09, 8 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) 20:04, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Magufuli Cabinet Navbox 2018 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused; better to focus on Template:Cabinet of Tanzania Frietjes (talk) 15:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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) 20:07, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:MajorLatinGrammyAwards footer (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused Frietjes (talk) 14:50, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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) 20:07, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Male field hockey kit (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused Frietjes (talk) 14:50, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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 redirect to Template:Massacres or pogroms against Jews. History is worth retaining as templates are not exact duplicates. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Massacres during the Shoah (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused; generally duplicates Template:Massacres or pogroms against Jews Frietjes (talk) 14:49, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete duplicate template. Orientls (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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) 20:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:8TeamBracket Championship (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused; redundant to other 8TeamBracket templates Frietjes (talk) 14:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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) 19:57, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:4TeamBracket with 3rd-FIRS World Championship (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused; redundant to other 4TeamBracket templates Frietjes (talk) 14:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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) 19:57, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:4TeamBracket-1semifinal-2legfinal (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused Frietjes (talk) 14:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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) 19:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:3RoundBracket (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and deprecated; could be redirected if a redirect is useful. Frietjes (talk) 14:43, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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) 19:56, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:2018 National Premier Leagues Victoria table (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and out-of-date; the updated table is in the main article Frietjes (talk) 14:41, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom Hhkohh (talk) 14:45, 11 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) 00:09, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game A1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game A2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game A3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game A4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game A5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game A6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game B1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game B2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game B3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game B4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game B5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game B6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game C1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game C2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game C3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game C4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game C5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game C6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game D1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game D2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game D3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game D4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game D5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game D6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game QF1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game QF2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game QF3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game QF4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game SF1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game SF2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game BM (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:2018 Asian Games women's 3-on-3 basketball game GM (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Reason is same as yesterday TfD, so should be substed Hhkohh (talk) 11:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@This, that and the other: Can you run TTObot to add ((subst:tfd)), Thanks Hhkohh (talk) 11:10, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot do any TTObot work this week, due to extensive real-life commitments. Please consider alternatives, including posting at WP:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks. — This, that and the other (talk) 11:12, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pkbwcgs: can you run AWB again? Hhkohh (talk) 11:13, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hhkohh: Frietjes has tagged them all. Pkbwcgs (talk) 14:41, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete after merging with the main article and using LST in the other articles per the other discussion. Frietjes (talk) 14:19, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  @Frietjes: There are another 110 templates in Category:2018 Asian Games sepak takraw game reference templates that I need to nominate for deletion. How do I get around nominating them all for deletion? Unfortunately, Twinkle doesn't assist in mass nominations. Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:24, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Pkbwcgs, I would like to see the subarticles for Sepak takraw at the 2018 Asian Games expanded first, since many of these have no home at the moment. once that's done, I would be happy to help with the mass nomination. Frietjes (talk) 15:34, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  @Frietjes: I think all those subarticles are well expanded already. the results were already there in the tables. these templates should not be created in first place. they are incomplete and unnecessary specially for this sport of sepaktakraw. Mohsen1248 (talk) 15:50, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Mohsen1248, fair point. I agree that the tables are in many ways more complete. it would be useful to get the match report links into the tables before they are deleted. Frietjes (talk) 16:15, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  @Frietjes: That's possible but since the official website was terrible, if you click on those match reports you only can see the final result. I mean no set scores. I found the PDF results book here with complete details. I think maybe it's better to just use that as the reference for the whole article !? Mohsen1248 (talk) 16:23, 8 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) 19:31, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:S-line/Sydney Trains right/SouthCircle (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:S-line/Sydney Trains left/SouthCircle (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:S-line/Sydney Trains right/NorthernNorth (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:S-line/Sydney Trains left/NorthernNorth (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All of these templates are either unused or used only in one talkpage and one sandbox - both of which are already partially broken. Their existence just clutters the category they are in and adds confusion for people trying to work out the template system for these lines. Gareth (talk) 06:18, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete all per nom Hhkohh (talk) 10:55, 8 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 no consensus. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:28, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Module:Leading zeros (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

There are a lot ways of doing the things this does without a special lua module (Module:String2 has a stripZeroes function, one could write a simple pattern using Module:string (^0*), Module:StringFunc has a function that validates a number). There could be some value in a "is this a number" module, but that belongs in Module:Math, not standalone. ((3x|p))ery (talk) 02:46, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• @Pppery: Please refer to Wikipedia talk:Lua/Archive 7#Request Lua module for removing/striping leading zeros. This lua module was first discussed in the Lua talk page. We were hoping to create a module that not only strip leading zeros fast and easy, but also giving out a "good looking" error message all in one simple module. I would suggest keeping it as it could be used in various ticker symbol templates - this simplifies the coding needed in the templates, especially for the ones who don't know how to use magic words. Cheers. –Wefk423 (talk) 09:34, 8 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 relisted on 2018 October 16. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 16:40, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Module:Italian_provinces (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. Unneeded now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:27, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Module:Gamelist counter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Module:Table row counter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Module:Gamelist counter with Module:Table row counter.
These two modules are mostly duplicates of eachother, plus Module:Gamelist counter is unused outside of the unused template that it implements. I wouldn't oppose simply deleting Module:Gamelist counter and Template:Gamelist counter, but a module that counts rows in a table matching a specific pattern could easily be useful. ((3x|p))ery (talk) 01:40, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the creator of this template, it was made for game list articles with the ability to count game and game exclusives, but as the consensus ended with exclusivity status to drop from tables in all game list articles, this template became useless. I'm fine with it deleted. Though I agree that it's got nice concept being able to count something from the table. Rukario-sama ^ㅈ^ -(...) 10:11, 8 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 relisted on 2018 October 16. (non-admin closure) Hhkohh (talk) 16:40, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Module:Log_globals (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 merge to Module:Reply to. Consensus to merge these templates and modules. If functionality can be implemented at Module:Reply to please sandbox it and post at Template talk:Reply to. Deletion of ping2 is delayed for 30 days to allow this to happen. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:19, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Ping2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Module:Ping2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Given that ((Reply to)) has been implemented in Lua since 2016, I don't see a need for this underused fork of it. I wouldn't oppose merging with Template:Reply to, but don't think that doing so is necessary ((3x|p))ery (talk) 02:35, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Underused is right. Delete as an unnecessary fork. --Izno (talk) 15:21, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• delete underused and not needed. – BrandonXLF ^(t@lk) 00:22, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• I believe the point of Ping2 is in that it does not show the username in the body of the message, if a certain condition is met? That is something 'Reply to' does not do? --Gryllida (talk) 03:26, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  That is one of its features, yes, however its only used by two users, doesn't seem super-important to me, and in any case could easily be merged. ((3x|p))ery (talk) 03:55, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - Interesting template, though severely underused. However, no harm in keeping it around. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 06:19, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• delete, ((reply to)) allows for more than one recipient. Frietjes (talk) 14:36, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. This has other exclusive features, see above; it isn't just a multi-ping. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 20:06, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep unless its functionality is merged into ((ping)). I don't see any reason to inconvenience the editors who use this template, no matter how few they might be. – Uanfala (talk) 08:59, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Templates which have been around for 4 years and found only 10 uses? I don't think complicating the other module is worth that. --Izno (talk) 23:26, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, then don't delete this one :) – Uanfala (talk) 00:05, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah, no. We don't leave unused modules lying around. This is an unused module. --Izno (talk) 00:47, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  A module with 13 transclusions [1] is not "unused". – Uanfala (talk) 08:14, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Relative to its more-used nearly-the-same functionality, it is. Please don't wikilawyer the word 'unused'. --Izno (talk) 16:04, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Unused - "not being, or never having been, used"; not wikilawyering, but merely access to a dictionary. Calling this unused is incorrect.— Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 18:04, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and just merge its functionality to ((Reply to)); that would address all issues here. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:30, 11 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).