August 11
- 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:Connected contributor. Primefac (talk) 08:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The template has effectively been deprecated and all uses should be converted to ((Connected contributor)). --Trialpears (talk) 23:47, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Replace and delete. This is a great example of why I dislike "deprecation". It is meaningless in the context of Wikipedia, as can be seen by this template being deprecated 4 years ago saying yet still in-use. --Gonnym (talk) 06:18, 12 August 2019 (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).
Template:Arn
- 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. Primefac (talk) 08:02, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Talk page banner for a process deprecated in 2006. 1 transclusion in a sandbox that hasn't been edited for 7 years. --Trialpears (talk) 23:09, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I have no objection to redirecting it to the (hopefully archived) page about the process -- but I don't see any point to limiting access to its revision history only to admins (which is what deleting would do). JesseW, the juggling janitor 02:22, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. Wikipedia is not GitHub and should not be a code repository. Templates, unlike articles, are not content, but serve a function, which this template does not, and has not for more time than most users of this site have even used it. --Gonnym (talk) 06:21, 12 August 2019 (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 after "orphaning" per the discussion below. Primefac (talk) 08:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
One transclusion at Template talk:Old AfD. The process is deprecated since 2005 so I think it's time for it to go or be redirected. --Trialpears (talk) 23:06, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Redirect to Template:Old AfD with conditions that have to be met prior to redirection. (See my comments in this discussion for details. Steel1943 (talk) 16:20, 12 August 2019 (UTC) ) As long as Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:Votes for deletion contains pages that are not redirects (which it currently does ... since I've been working on that off-and-on for a few years now), this template still serves a purpose since Template:Old AfD does not utilize the "Wikipedia:Votes for deletion" prefix by default. Once/if all of the pages on that list (that represent discussions) are properly converted to redirects, then this template should be redirected to Template:Old AfD. (Also, at the present time, Template:Old AfD does not contain a votepage= parameter, which is a parameter Template:Old VfD utilizes in lieu of the page= parameter in Template:Old AfD.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:13, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Steel1943 If I converted the 40 non-redirects listed by your link would you support this proposal? --Trialpears (talk) 23:20, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @Trialpears: I would, but here's the thing with that and why it's taken me so gosh darn long to resolve the non-redirects. Most (but probably all) of these non-redirects are the result of a bot about a decade ago not being able to move them to their corresponding "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion" titles since there is/was already a page there (usually a 2nd nomination in the new "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion" prefix.) Also, disregarding what I have been doing extensively (such as making sure that all later discussions are moved ... such as moving "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/7388436" to "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/7388436 (2nd nomination)" before moving "Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/7388436" to "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/7388436"), when/if these pages are moved, in my opinion since I tend to be an archivist, all of the incoming links to these pages (in all namespaces) would need to be updated to ensure that talk pages and archives are not broken. Steel1943 (talk) 23:35, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Steel1943 I will make sure it gets done. Updating links will be essential as several of these discussions may be relevant in the future. I will have to request temporary page mover right, but that shouldn't be a problem. --Trialpears (talk) 23:53, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. The Holding Cell is here exactly for when a result needs work done before the template can be deleted. Steel1943 has explained the process that needs to happen, when it happens, this can be deleted. No reason to have this conversation again then. --Gonnym (talk) 06:25, 12 August 2019 (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:Audio sample. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:12, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Transcluded in six pages, none of them in the mainspace. Instead, they happen to be user sandboxes and one user page, mostly by users who created their accounts and then just don't contribute afterwards. Also, it can be confused with ((audio sample)), ((listen)), ((watch)), etc. The template should be substituted and then deleted. Alternatively, it can be deprecated into an error message. BTW, last year someone changed the template into some table. I recently found out, so I just reverted it back to some Wikipedia message, which is what was originally intended. George Ho (talk) 21:19, 11 August 2019 (UTC); edited, 21:33, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I created this as the sample template for training purposes 12 years ago. It has become a magnet for vandalism, and should be reverted where used. If watching it and the documentation for it is too much work, then I suppose it must be deleted, but I will be sad to see it go. — Jeff G. ツ 21:49, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Jeff G. In your latest version of the documentation page it says "The ((Sample)) template shows people sample results of the correct use of the ((Interwiki doc page pattern)) template. Please replace this information with how your template works. " The Interwiki doc page pattern template is now deleted. Is there still any reason to keep it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trialpears (talk • contribs) 21:54, 11 August 2019 (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 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Unused and undocumented. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:31, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- delete and potentially redirect to ((diff)). Frietjes (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - the name "diffs" seems to imply multiple diffs, which is not what the template does (it links to a single diff). –Sonicwave talk 06:22, 13 August 2019 (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).
New York Central Railroad s-line templates
British Home Championship football standings templates
- 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) 18:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
no longer used after being merged with the parent article (with attribution) per consensus at WT:FOOTY. Frietjes (talk) 13:58, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 12:51, 12 August 2019 (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 merge to Template:Auto archiving notice. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:15, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant to ((Auto archiving notice)). Both templates have very few transclusions. --Trialpears (talk) 12:12, 11 August 2019 (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).
Template:Notice2
- 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 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant to ((notice)). Only one transclusion. --Trialpears (talk) 12:00, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete; redundant and basically unused. Jc86035 (talk) 12:13, 11 August 2019 (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).
Template:RTA style