The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 speedy delete. G4 —SpacemanSpiff 03:39, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Sandeep Rana (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This was already deleted at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 December 10#Template:Sandeep Rana, but has reappeared. It appears to be an attempt to create an article in the form of a template.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  21:14, 28 December 2020 (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(s) or module(s) 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) 17:03, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Arne operas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Hides the image on mobile (the image should be retained in the articles when the template is removed). Readers would be better served by a horizontal navbox, at the foot of articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Becomes an excuse not to have a specialized lead image; redundant to the horizontal template. Aza24 (talk) 22:08, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – which horizontal template? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - as noted there does not currently appear to be a feasible replacement, and vertical navboxes are a permitted alternative to horizontal generally. Concerns around image placement/selection can be addressed by means other than deletion. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • A replacement navbox can be created once there is consensus to delete this template. What is "permitted" is immaterial; what matters is what best serves our readers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:52, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's no evidence readers would be any better served by a theoretical replacement than by the template that already exists. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:35, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and Aza24, no reason to treat this composer unlike Mozart, Verdi and Rossini. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:30, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• delete after replacing with Template:Thomas Arne, which is better in terms of layout. Frietjes (talk) 00:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  applied to operas, - thank you for making it --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:46, 14 January 2021 (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(s) or module(s) 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) 17:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Albinoni operas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only three transclusions. Fails WP:NENAN. Hides the image on mobile (the image should be retained in the articles when the template is removed). Readers would be better served by a horizontal navbox, at the foot of articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:15, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Becomes an excuse not to have a specialized lead image; redundant to the horizontal template. Aza24 (talk) 22:08, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – which horizontal template? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - as noted there does not currently appear to be a feasible replacement, and vertical navboxes are a permitted alternative to horizontal generally. Given the scope of the template the number of transclusions makes complete sense. Concerns around image placement/selection can be addressed by means other than deletion. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • A replacement navbox culld be created once there is consensus to delete this template; however, since the "scope of the template" is three articles, this fails WP:NEANN, as stated. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • "A replacement navbox can be created …": cart before horse. ((WP:NEANN)) is an essay. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:47, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not in the least "cart before horse" - we regularly decide such things at TfD. WP:NENAN is an essay that describes the regular consensus about navboxes at TfD. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:49, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and Aza24, no reason to treat this composer unlike Mozart, Verdi and Rossini. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:30, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, inferior to navbox, visual clutter, hides the image. No such user (talk) 09:23, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• delete after replacing with Template:Tomaso Albinoni, which is better in terms of layout. Frietjes (talk) 00:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  applied to operas, - thank you for making it --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2021 (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(s) or module(s) 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) 17:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Auber operas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Hides the image on mobile (the image should be retained in the articles when the template is removed). Readers would be better served by a horizontal navbox, at the foot of articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Becomes an excuse not to have a specialized lead image; redundant to the horizontal template. Aza24 (talk) 22:08, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – which horizontal template? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - as noted there does not currently appear to be a feasible replacement, and vertical navboxes are a permitted alternative to horizontal generally. Concerns around image placement/selection can be addressed by means other than deletion. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • A replacement navbox can be created once there is consensus to delete this template. What is "permitted" is immaterial; what matters is what best serves our readers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:44, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • "A replacement navbox can be created …": cart before horse. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:47, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not in the least "cart before horse" - we regularly decide such things at TfD. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:49, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • As we don't have any evidence on what a reader may prefer, only what we as individuals prefer, we can't really assert that one is better for readers than the other. That's not a strong rationale to create a new navbox, that we know ahead of time would overlap with this one. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:27, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and Aza24, no reason to treat this composer unlike Mozart, Verdi and Rossini. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:30, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, inferior to navbox, not a way to do it. No such user (talk) 09:23, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• delete after replacing with Template:Daniel Auber, which is better in terms of layout. Frietjes (talk) 00:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  applied to operas, - thank you for making it --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:05, 14 January 2021 (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(s) or module(s) 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) 17:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Bianchi operas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Hides the image on mobile (the image should be retained in the articles when the template is removed). Readers would be better served by a horizontal navbox, at the foot of articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:27, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Becomes an excuse not to have a specialized lead image; redundant to the horizontal template. Aza24 (talk) 22:08, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – which horizontal template? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - as noted there does not currently appear to be a feasible replacement, and vertical navboxes are a permitted alternative to horizontal generally. Concerns around image placement/selection can be addressed by means other than deletion. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:09, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • A replacement navbox can be created once there is consensus to delete this template. What is "permitted" is immaterial; what matters is what best serves our readers. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:45, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • "A replacement navbox can be created …": cart before horse. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:47, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

      Horse pulls cart now, navbox created. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:53, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• delete after replacing with Template:Francesco Bianchi, which is better in terms of layout. Frietjes (talk) 00:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  that one was already in place --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:06, 14 January 2021 (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(s) or module(s) 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 2021 January 7. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Taiwan_Dancer_aircraft (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(s) or module(s) 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) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 06:27, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Swift Xi (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is information generally given in infoboxes not navboxes. Please note that we have issues with Japanese based users adding promotional content to these articles, and thus there may also be COI issues in play here. BilCat (talk) 03:25, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This info is already covered in the navbox. Also, this template isn't used in the Swift Xi article. Also, the related template Template:Swift Engineering has problems and could use condensing. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:11, 29 December 2020 (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(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:06, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Module:College color (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Module:Sports color (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Module:College color with Module:Sports color.
The two modules has similar functions. Module:College color/data should moved to Module:Sports color/NCAA or Module:Sports color/college and the main functions can du the Module:Sports color Malo95 (talk) 14:43, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:42, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. I would suggest to move it to Module:Sports color/college as there are non-NCAA (non-US) team articles using the module. – McVahl (talk) 05:08, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm not familiar enough with the functionality to comment, but I do know that college color is used for some colleges that don't have sports teams or whose sports teams are a different color than the color used for the college itself in non-athletic places (in which case it's a bit inconsistent). I'd really prefer this be handled by Wikidata, as the giant data table is extremely unwieldy and this is exactly the sort of thing Wikidata is set up for, but unfortunately that hasn't gotten traction yet. ((u|Sdkb)) ^talk 21:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Sdkb's point about colleges whose team colors are different than the school colors would need to be resolved before I could support a merge. I think this would add to the confusion. --Bsherr (talk) 17:44, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for now per Sdkb, some colleges have different colors for their athletic teams. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:45, 16 January 2021 (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(s) or module(s) 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 per WP:SILENCE. (non-admin closure) Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 03:22, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Indian martial arts sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant. For this and Template:Indian martial arts the content is the same. Some articles use both for decorative purpose. 2409:4073:191:6EDD:19E6:252A:7404:F714 (talk) 07:58, 20 December 2020 (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(s) or module(s) 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 consensus on deletion. Suggest trimming along the lines of Novem Linguae. No prejudice against renomination if that doesn't work. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 06:29, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Massive in size, full of red links. It features information that belongs to a separate article; i.e. Government of Greece. Since its usage is disputed and taking into consideration the fact that most of the ministers included have not separate articles in en.wikipedia, I nominate it for deletion. --Rodamanth (talk) 13:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Trim. I think deleting "Alternate Ministers" and "Deputy Ministers" would get this template's size and red links under control. Also, I don't think the main contributors were notified, so pinging @ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ, Nizolan, and SoSivr:. The last two look inactive, but the first person edited a week ago. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:08, 29 December 2020 (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).