Template:2016 NatWest t20 Blast North Division
- 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) 21:24, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Both single-use and should be substituted where used as a standard table. There aren't any articles for any of these teams for the respective years which makes their ability to be included on multiple articles very limited. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:22, 14 August 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).
Template:2014 Royal London One-Day Cup Group A
- 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) 19:34, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Propose substituting these templates as standard non-template tables on the articles where these are used as these won't require updating the standings. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:09, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Fine, so long as they are replaced on all pages where they are used, including any team season pages. Bs1jac (talk) 08:58, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- They will be after this Tfd is closed. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:03, 15 August 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).
Template:Eastleigh to Romsey Line diagram
- 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) 18:48, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unused template that duplicates ((Eastleigh to Romsey Line)). TheImaCow (talk · contribs) nominated the template for speedy deletion in 2020 on those grounds; Primefac (talk · contribs) declined it because of differing content and the T3 category has since been retired. Mackensen (talk) 17:27, 14 August 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).
G:link route templates
- 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) 18:49, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned route diagram templates; they were removed during a refactoring of G:link in 2016 and have not been re-added. Mackensen (talk) 17:15, 14 August 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).
Template:Icelandic presidential election
- 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. (Note, now replaced by Template:Election results) Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:15, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Used only on a few articles, but its content can be substituted without much change to the display of the results tables. There shouldn't be a separate template for a single country's elections especially given the few uses. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:14, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Needs to be converted to wikitext and the excessive custom styling removed. --Izno (talk) 23:25, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Convert per Izno and delete. But agree with that premise that a template should be created for these tables to make format consistent (but this isn't it). Gonnym (talk) 13:34, 21 August 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).
Template:CP Cartier Subdivision
- 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) 19:18, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unused and no parent article that could support it. Mackensen (talk) 17:07, 14 August 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).
Template:Orissa Legislative Assembly election, 1952
- 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. Izno (talk) 17:07, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
1952 should be substitued on both articles it is used on. 2009 is single-use and hasn't much usage being on it's own template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Orissa Legislative Assembly election, 1952; substitute and delete Orissa state assembly elections results, 2009. The former has multiple transclusions. The latter has only one transclusion. --Bsherr (talk) 04:14, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.Relisting comment: consensus to substitute and delete the 2009 template, but relisting for more discussion about the other one
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Frietjes (talk) 20:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Subst to the Legislative Assembly election articles and delete and transclude if used elsewhere. Templates are rubbish places to keep election results as they are largely unwatched and prone to vandalism or unsourced changes. It's more efficient to keep them on an article where unwanted changes are more likely to be spotted. Number 57 15:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:51, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Subset and delete to 1952 Orissa Legislative Assembly election. Gonnym (talk) 13:32, 21 August 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).
Template:2021 New Zealand Women's Northern League
- 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 keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:16, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Both should be substituted where used on the respective articles. Results tables like this shouldn't be on a separate space. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:33, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The practice of using section transclusion with only include tags to transclude a table is inferior to using a template, because it prevents the use of VTE links and is confusing for less experienced editors. As a best practice, section transclusion should be used when the purpose is to transclude the section, not as a workaround to avoid a template. Easier to handle vandislism of results when on its own separate template as well. — NZFC(talk)(cont) 20:09, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It is much easier to upkeep and monitor vandalism when the league table is under a separate template, as well as gives the ability to easily transclude in multiple pages about the season. --SuperJew (talk) 22:43, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 13:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep until end of season (when there will be no need to update further), then subst and delete at that point. GiantSnowman 13:45, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per above. Seany91 (talk) 14:42, 17 August 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).
Template:2021 New Zealand National League
- 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 keep. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:16, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All single-use that should be substituted on the mainspace 2021 New Zealand National League article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:24, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The practice of using section transclusion with only include tags to transclude a table is inferior to using a template, because it prevents the use of VTE links and is confusing for less experienced editors. As a best practice, section transclusion should be used when the purpose is to transclude the section, not as a workaround to avoid a template. Easier to handle vandislism of results when on its own separate template as well. — NZFC(talk)(cont) 20:10, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It is much easier to upkeep and monitor vandalism when the league table is under a separate template, as well as gives the ability to easily transclude in multiple pages about the season. --SuperJew (talk) 22:43, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 13:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep until end of season (when there will be no need to update further), then subst and delete at that point. GiantSnowman 13:45, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per above. Seany91 (talk) 14:43, 17 August 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).
Template:2016 National Women's League table (New Zealand)
- 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 August 21. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:18, 21 August 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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:19, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The 1897 template is single-use and should be substituted on the election article it is used on. The rest should be substituted on the respective presidential articles and transcluded where else used using the #section-h function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose increased use of section transclusion of articles in article space (should be portals only). Per what @Johnuniq said here, this is too likely to break. —Kusma (talk) 08:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdraw and hold a central discussion on how to handle the many situations where this arises. These nominations might not be the major problem I was referring to in the above link mentioning my username, but editors experience template transclusion all the time, so why complicate matters with tricky section transclusions? Have a look at Help:Labeled section transclusion including its "Dealing with stray whitespace"—why do that? Are we trying save server disk space? Section transclusion is bound to break or at least give undesirable side-effects when people edit the source section without knowing or caring about where the section is used. By contrast, editors know that editing a template is going to affect wherever the template is used. For anyone interested, my major concern is with ((excerpt)) and the attempts to rewrite the MediaWiki parser such as at Module:Transcluder. Johnuniq (talk) 09:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Then we can just substitute if doing the section transclusion will cause trouble. Then for every template below the 1897 election, the section for the respective election can be a link to the section of the election article for the results on the Presidential elections in the Philippines. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 13:59, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- What's the problem with leaving as is? —Kusma (talk) 14:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Because they won't be used often outside their current use. Templates in table format should have multiple uses on pages. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 13:38, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Why? One use is enough if you ask me, and two are plenty. Subst loses the author attribution and delete breaks old revisions. I'd like to see a stronger case for deletion to counter these downsides. —Kusma (talk) 15:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- In the past weeks, when a user subst the templates I nominated, the user credits the original author or authors in the edit summary. So attribution can still be given. As I've been going through these election templates, they were created for one purpose. Normally templates are supposed to have multiple uses. Navboxes are not created for say one article, but multiple articles. But with the information that's presented here should be part of the article as a standard table. Why would there need to be election information from two centuries ago on a separate template when it can be easily be included within the article it was created for. It's not like the results from 1897 are going to change 124 years later. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Results can still change, and their presentation might. For 1897's case, I don't think it's used in plenty of articles but for post- and including 1935, these results are transcluded in multiple places. If a better template is created, or we'd need to change something (like somebody dug up stats for blank ballots!) someone would only have to change just one page, and it is guaranteed to affect all transclusions. Let's say we section-transclude (is there a name for this process?), there's no guarantee all transclutions will be updated; some may have screwed up coding so it won't be affected. If we wholesale substitute, someone has to keep track where it was substituted, then change every substitution to what the new version is... this isn't the best use of time in Wikipedia.
- For an example, see the 1953 election. This was the first revision in 2007. Edited in 2010 to include "Total" column. Edited in 2016 to include valid and invalid votes. Updated in 2021 to use Election results template. So, when I changed it in 2010, I thought, this would be the last time I'd edit this template... guess I was wrong lol. Who know someone else would be changing this in 2025? He'd have to change 5 articles? Such wasteful use of time! Howard the Duck (talk) 15:55, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- These templates were converted to use ((Election results)) just recently. If we'd transclude these and in the future, a better template is made, I don't want to edit the 2-4 articles the transclusions are saved at to make sure everything is the same. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The practice of using section transclusion with onlyinclude tags to transclude a table is inferior to using a template, because it prevents the use of VTE links and is confusing for less experienced editors. As a best practice, section transclusion should be used when the purpose is to transclude the section, not as a workaround to avoid a template. --Bsherr (talk) 00:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Frietjes (talk) 14:33, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:08, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I will propose substitution as a better alternative if those beleive using section transclusons is going to cause more problems that it all solves. All that is required is a simple change to the coding of the tables at the top of the resutls table. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:08, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- 1992 presidential candidate Emilio Mario Osmeña is about to be moved to Lito Osmeña. If these are substituted, we'd have to change each and every page this article was substituted into, with no guarantee we'd change every instance, because we won't know where this was substituted to, and with no guarantee that every "substitution" will be the same as all the others because again, we can't keep track on each page it was substituted from. I absolutely fail to see what are we safeguarding against, while making it a lot harder of doing maintenance and/or mass edits in case we need to. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:34, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I won't be against substituting and deleting the 1897 template though. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:36, 15 August 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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:20, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All are used on the presidential election articles and should be substituted on there and usage outside the main election article should be transcluded using the #section-h function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose increased use of section transclusion of articles in article space, too complicated for users, likely to break and too costly. —Kusma (talk) 08:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Then we can just substitute if doing the section transclusion will cause trouble. The section for the respective election can be a link to the section of the election article for the results on the Presidential elections in the Philippines. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:00, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- These templates were converted to use ((Election results)) just recently. If we'd transclude these and in the future, a better template is made I don't want to edit the 2-4 articles the transclusions are saved at to make sure everything is the same. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:08, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- A simple change in the coding is all that is needed. It doesn't change much. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:10, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The practice of using section transclusion with onlyinclude tags to transclude a table is inferior to using a template, because it prevents the use of VTE links and is confusing for less experienced editors. As a best practice, section transclusion should be used when the purpose is to transclude the section, not as a workaround to avoid a template. --Bsherr (talk) 00:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Frietjes (talk) 14:33, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:08, 14 August 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 no consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:20, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Used on two election articles. Should be substituted on the senate election articles and on the general election articles for these years should be transcluded using the #section-h function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:42, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose increased use of section transclusion of articles in article space, too complicated for users, likely to break and too costly. —Kusma (talk) 08:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Then we can just substitute if doing the section transclusion will cause trouble. The section for the respective election can be a link to the section of the election article for the results. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm planning to convert these to a better template, something similar to ((Election results)). I don't want to edit the 2-3 articles each template is used at just to make sure everything is the same. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The practice of using section transclusion with onlyinclude tags to transclude a table is inferior to using a template, because it prevents the use of VTE links and is confusing for less experienced editors. As a best practice, section transclusion should be used when the purpose is to transclude the section, not as a workaround to avoid a template. --Bsherr (talk) 00:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Frietjes (talk) 14:33, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Subst and delete. Subst to senate election articles and transclude to general election article. Gonnym (talk) 12:00, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:08, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Section transclusion breaks easily. Substituting and deleting prevents you from making mass edits. (These should be converted to a better template soon, and substituting and deleting it makes it harder for the places that show the template the exact same appearance on every place. Exception: substitute and delete 1951 and 1955 special election templates. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:43, 15 August 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).
Philippine Assembly election results
- 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) 19:21, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All should be substituted on the respective election articles. And usage outside the main election articles should be transcluded elsewhere using the #section-h function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:30, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- These templates were converted to use ((Election results)) just recently. If we'd transclude these and in the future, a better template is made, I don't want to edit the 2-4 articles the transclusions are saved at to make sure everything is the same. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:10, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Substitute and delete 1912 Philippine Assembly election results, 1940 Philippine National Assembly special election results, 1984 Philippine parliamentary election results, 1987 Philippine House election results, keep the rest. The former have one transclusion and can be substituted therefore. The latter have multiple transclusions and, for the reasons above, section transclusion is inferior to the template pages. --Bsherr (talk) 00:29, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Frietjes (talk) 14:33, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:08, 14 August 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).
Template:Hanzelijn railway diagram
- 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. ✗plicit 13:18, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unused; duplicates Template:Lelystad-Zwolle railway diagram. Mackensen (talk) 12:38, 14 August 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).
Taipei Metro RDTs
- 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. ✗plicit 13:17, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unused; the parent articles were merged into the larger articles Bannan line and Tamsui–Xinyi line that have their own route diagram templates. Mackensen (talk) 12:18, 14 August 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).
Template:Assembly constituencies of Andhra Padesh
- 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. ✗plicit 09:45, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Duplication of Template:Assembly constituencies of Andhra Pradesh. Also unused. MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:44, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete -- Tharun S Yadla (talk) 05:12, 16 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward One Alderman Election, 1930
- 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. ✗plicit 04:19, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward One Alderman Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward One Alderman Election, 1932 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward One Alderman Election, 1933 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward One Alderman Election, 1934 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward One Alderman Election, 1944 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All single-use and should be substituted on the respective election articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But Hamilton is not a global city for the purposes of making its city councillors "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL #2 — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:12, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:25, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Two Alderman Election, 1930
- 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. ✗plicit 04:19, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Two Alderman Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Two Alderman Election, 1932 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Two Alderman Election, 1933 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Two Alderman Election, 1934 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Two Alderman Election, 1944 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All single-use and should be substituted on the respective election articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But Hamilton is not a global city for the purposes of making its city councillors "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL #2 — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:13, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:25, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Three Alderman Election, 1930
- 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. ✗plicit 04:19, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Three Alderman Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Three Alderman Election, 1932 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Three Alderman Election, 1933 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Three Alderman Election, 1934 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Three Alderman Election, 1944 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All single-use and should be substituted on the respective election articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But Hamilton is not a global city for the purposes of making its city councillors "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL #2 — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:13, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:25, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Four Alderman Election, 1930
- 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. ✗plicit 04:18, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Four Alderman Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Four Alderman Election, 1932 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Four Alderman Election, 1933 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Four Alderman Election, 1934 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Four Alderman Election, 1944 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All single-use and should be substituted on the respective election articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But Hamilton is not a global city for the purposes of making its city councillors "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL #2 — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:13, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:26, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Five Alderman Election, 1930
- 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. ✗plicit 04:18, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Five Alderman Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Five Alderman Election, 1932 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Five Alderman Election, 1933 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Five Alderman Election, 1934 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Five Alderman Election, 1944 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All single-use and should be substituted on the respective election articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But Hamilton is not a global city for the purposes of making its city councillors "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL #2 — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:26, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Six Alderman Election, 1930
- 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. ✗plicit 04:17, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Six Alderman Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Six Alderman Election, 1932 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Six Alderman Election, 1933 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Six Alderman Election, 1934 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Six Alderman Election, 1944 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All single-use and should be substituted on the respective election articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But Hamilton is not a global city for the purposes of making its city councillors "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL #2 — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:26, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Seven Alderman Election, 1930
- 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. ✗plicit 04:17, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Seven Alderman Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Seven Alderman Election, 1932 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Seven Alderman Election, 1933 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Seven Alderman Election, 1934 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Seven Alderman Election, 1944 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All single-use and should be substituted on the respective election articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But Hamilton is not a global city for the purposes of making its city councillors "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL #2 — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:24, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Eight Alderman Election, 1930
- 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. ✗plicit 04:17, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Eight Alderman Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Eight Alderman Election, 1932 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Eight Alderman Election, 1933 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Eight Alderman Election, 1934 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Ward Eight Alderman Election, 1944 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All single-use and should be substituted on the respective election articles. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But Hamilton is not a global city for the purposes of making its city councillors "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL #2 — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:24, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario, money referendums, 1950
- 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. ✗plicit 03:50, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Both are single-use and should be substituted on the 1950 election article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:34, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of a template like this is to keep the presentation of information consistent across multiple articles — such as federal or provincial election results, where there's an article about the electoral district and a separate biographical article about the MP or MPP (and sometimes also separate biographical articles about one or more losing candidates who may have had preexisting notability for other reasons) that all need to display and reference the same set of results. But if there's only one article for a set of results to be used in, then the results table is just directly coded in that article rather than chunking them out to a separate template. So these should be substituted and deleted, because there's no need for a separate template if it's only being called by one article. Bearcat (talk) 16:21, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:23, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario municipal election, 2010 Endorsements - Campaign Life Coalition
- 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. ✗plicit 03:46, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The first three 2010 are single-use and should be substituted on the respective 2010 election article. The 2014 template is unused and redundant as the article uses a different table for the same purpose. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:25, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of a template like this is to keep the presentation of information consistent across multiple articles — such as federal or provincial election results, where there's an article about the electoral district and a separate biographical article about the MP or MPP (and sometimes also separate biographical articles about one or more losing candidates who may have had preexisting notability for other reasons) that all need to reference the same set of results. But if there's only one article for a table to be used in, then that table is just directly coded in that article rather than chunking it out to a separate template. So these should be substituted and deleted, because there's no need for a separate template if it's only being called by one article. Bearcat (talk) 16:24, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete all are now unused. Frietjes (talk) 17:23, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton, Ontario Board of Education Trustee Ward Eight Election, 1930
- 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. ✗plicit 03:45, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Board of Education Trustee Ward Eight Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Board of Education Trustee Ward Five Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Board of Education Trustee Ward Four Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Board of Education Trustee Ward One Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Board of Education Trustee Ward Seven Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Board of Education Trustee Ward Six Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Board of Education Trustee Ward Three Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hamilton, Ontario Board of Education Trustee Ward Two Election, 1930 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
All single-use and should be substituted on the 1930 election article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:15, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But school board is not a notable office under WP:NPOL, with the result that the trustees don't have biographical articles to use these in — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:22, 20 August 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).
Template:Hamilton municipal election, 1946 - Ward One Aldermanic election
- 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. ✗plicit 03:31, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Both single-use and should be substituted on the respective election articles these two are used on. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:46, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose per my comments on the 3 group nominations at TFD2021 August 13. Per WP:MULTI, discussion of the use of election templates should be centralised, not distributed across a flurry of separate TFDs: 15 so far, and counting. This is getting way out of hand. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:02, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The purpose of dedicated election results templates like this is to keep information consistent across multiple articles — for example, for an electoral district in Parliament or the provincial legislature, a template is appropriate for the presentation of election results because it can be used in the electoral district's article and the MP's/MPP's biographical article (and in some cases a non-winning candidate who has notability for other reasons, such as a former incumbent that the winner defeated), and thus keep the information and presentation consistent across multiple articles. But such templates are not routinely used for all presentation of all Canadian election results — if the office isn't inherently notable for the purposes of securing a separate biographical article about the winner and thus the election article itself is the only place for the election results to appear, then the election results table should just be coded in that article rather than by calling separate templates. But Hamilton is not a global city for the purposes of making its city councillors "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL #2 — and thus the election article itself is the only place any of these templates is actually being used. Accordingly, these should all be substituted since there aren't multiple articles to cross-reference, and then deleted. Bearcat (talk) 16:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- delete after substitution (only used in one article). Frietjes (talk) 17:22, 20 August 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).