The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Frietjes (talk) 14:36, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
All should be substituted where used as there is no election mainspace for them. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:54, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 13:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Unused. Same as the August 2 templates nominated as it is pointless for it's intended purpose. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Unused template. Duplicates and can be replaced by Template:Sub judice. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:45, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Frietjes (talk) 14:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
There is no consensus to allow editors to remove or strike !votes at deletion discussions based solely on the rationale that they have WP:NOREASON. A template that warns editors that their !votes have been removed due to a lack of reasoning is therefore of questionable use. This template also appears to have never been used, with the phrase "Please note that deletion debates are consensus-based discussions, not ballot polls," only turning up two results, this template and User:Passengerpigeon/sandbox where the template was tested. Chess (talk) (please use ((reply to|Chess))
on reply) 04:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Frietjes (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
This template's intended use is specifically in ((Infobox surah)), but then it should be hardcoded in there, rather than as a separate template. However, its purpose seems to be merely adding another Arabic rendition (external, of unknown copyright status?) in addition to the extant |name-ar
parameter. Thus I'd rather see this template deleted than merged. HyperGaruda (talk) 04:19, 10 August 2021 (UTC)