< July 1 July 3 >

July 2

Template:Enroute

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) 01:03, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This table-cell template is only transcluded via its documentation, and has no transclusions in article space. The user who created it informed me that it was for temporary use within one article, to complement some sister templates, and therefore might be used again. But upon closer inspection, that article mostly just uses the first parameter of the widely useful ((Yes)) and ((No)) templates. For future missions to the moon (transit time is only about three days), I'm sure that article could just utilize the first parameter of one of the numerous existing table-cell templates. I don't think we should be creating hardcoded table-cell templates for every permutation in every article; we have enough already. – voidxor 20:51, 2 July 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).

Template:National Democratic Party (Bangladesh)/meta/shortname

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. On the one hand, there is the argument that typing in three letters is much easier than typing out the full template name. On the other hand, based on similar templates I believe this template is called more-or-less automatically by other templates, and removing this particular template without discussion of similarly-called templates is problematic and could potentially break the system. That being said, previous discussions have indicated that unused templates should be deleted yet they can be REFUNDED if they find use again.
I would strongly encourage a discussion on this matter, with the main focus being whether these templates are necessary (much like the ((flag))/"Country data XYZ" group) or whether they can be somehow combined (like the "Country IOC alias XYZ" group). If there is suitable participation at such a discussion, and the outcome is to combine/merge/delete/etc the various meta templates into one main template, I see no reason why we would need a new TFD to enact such an outcome. Primefac (talk) 01:23, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless template. The template name is longer than the text that is the sole content of the template. Whpq (talk) 20:00, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Color? I think your comment must refer to a different template. Thincat (talk) 21:18, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you're right, I made a mistake. Still think this should be deleted. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:02, 4 July 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).

Template:Zaker Party/meta/color

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. In this discussion there is no consensus (reasonable arguments on both sides). However, as I explained further up the page, this appears to be a "family" of templates that needs wider discussion about how to proceed (delete as they become unused, or bundle into one large "meta" template (no pun intended). Primefac (talk) 01:31, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless template. The colour can just be directly coded. Whpq (talk) 19:58, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah i agree to keep it as Candidate with party link template cant be colored.If a party has party article,they should have meta color atleast. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EhsanAhmed (talkcontribs) 10:42, 9 July 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).

Template:Zaker Party/meta/shortname

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. In this discussion there is no consensus (reasonable arguments on both sides). However, as I explained further up the page, this appears to be a "family" of templates that needs wider discussion about how to proceed (delete as they become unused, or bundle into one large "meta" template (no pun intended). Primefac (talk) 01:31, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless template. The template name is longer than the text that is the sole content of the template. Whpq (talk) 19:55, 2 July 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).

Template:United States Senate/meta/color

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 03:06, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless template. This was used only once which I reverted. Whpq (talk) 19:52, 2 July 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).

Template:Consensus-1

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 03:06, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This non-scheme user warning template attempts to cover several issues at once, but falls short on explanation besides providing links. The UW templates at WP:UTM are more suitable. Bsherr (talk) 07:17, 2 July 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).