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 redirect to Template:Maintenance category. A PetScan of the pages with both templates is here, and will be listed at the Holding cell. Primefac (talk) 16:10, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Cleanup category (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not widely used, most cleanup categories use ((Maintenance category)), which this should probably be redirected to (and then duplicate transclusions fixed). Elli (talk | contribs) 22:48, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This category is redundant to the main maintenance category. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the other template -- 65.93.183.191 (talk) 03:22, 22 June 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:05, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Infobox canada province symbols (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This infobox is unneeded. Canadian provinces already use ((Infobox province or territory of Canada)) which has the wanted items. Anything else that is needed can be asked for in that template's talk page and see if consensus is gained. Gonnym (talk) 21:51, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No need for this when an infobox already exists where the same information can be included on an article. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• delete, redundant to ((infobox region symbols)). Frietjes (talk) 23:14, 21 June 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 keep. Izno (talk) 04:38, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Largest cities of Vietnam (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Most populous cities in Vietnam (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging The cities linked in the Largest cities of Vietnam are already included in Most populous cities in Vietnam with the latter adding a few more cities. Thus, making the Largest cities template redundant. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge ((Largest cities of Vietnam)) into ((Most populous cities in Vietnam)) per nom and because ((Largest cities of Vietnam)) is an embedded list and is redundant to its WP:SAL.--Catchpoke (talk) 21:33, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Do not merge (for now). The "largest city" template set (see a list in the navbox at Template:Largest_cities_of_Germany) is rather widely used on country articles, like at Germany#Demographics. I think the solution right now is to remove the "largest city" templates from the city articles (where the "most populous city" box can stay), while keeping them when they are used in the Demographics sections, or at the Demographics of X articles.

We should have a discussion about substituting all of the "largest city" templates onto the country articles (or maybe turning them into wikitables instead of navboxes?), but there are dozens and dozens of them so the discussion should be combined, instead of the nominations of a handful today. — Goszei (talk) 00:46, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not advocating all of the Largest Cities templates to be deleted or merged. The ones that should be deleted are the ones that are unused or infrequently used, the ones that should be merged are the ones superseded by a navbox that has the same function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I am saying is that we should either: (1) keep all of the "largest city" template set, and narrowly use them each in one or two articles (i.e. in Germany and in Demographics of Germany), or (2) delete all of the "largest city" template set, and them substitute them into the country articles I just mentioned. I am not fully decided on which of these options are best, but I do not think we should delete/merge just a portion of them. — Goszei (talk) 01:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was a substantial discussion about converting these templates recently: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel. Based on this, the fix to the problems raised in that discussion could be as simple as just changing the template class? — Goszei (talk) 02:00, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the template class only changes a parameter and does not change the look or design of the template. -Catchpoke (talk) 22:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Two different templates with different purposes. One is used in the middle of articles to showcase lists of cities, and the other is used in articles about cities as a navigational template at the bottom. User:Catchpoke unsuccessfully nominated one of such templates a month ago already. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 02:08, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be a hypocrite! Your arguments there weren't even valid.--Catchpoke (talk) 03:26, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Do not merge. This is similar to the recently closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel, in which it was discussed that the "Largest cities of X" templates are not intended for use as end-article navboxes, but as in-article content. The two templates here are unrelated in purpose and use. The coding of the Largest Cities in X templates through navbox code is problematic, but this would be best covered as a whole rather than in individual nominations such as the Israel example and this one. However, where the Largest City in X template is being used as a navbox, it should be removed as redundant per as noted in the nom. CMD (talk) 07:26, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Two different templates with different purposes.Moxy- 11:53, 6 July 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 keep. Izno (talk) 04:36, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Largest cities of South Korea (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Most populous cities in South Korea (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging All twenty cities in the Largest cities template are listed in the same order in the Most populous navbox, but thirty-one more cities are included. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:07, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge ((Largest cities of South Korea)) into ((Most populous cities in South Korea)) per nom and because ((Largest cities of South Korea)) is an embedded list and is redundant to its WP:SAL.--Catchpoke (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not merge (for now). The "largest city" template set (see a list in the navbox at Template:Largest_cities_of_Germany) is rather widely used on country articles, like at Germany#Demographics. I think the solution right now is to remove the "largest city" templates from the city articles (where the "most populous city" box can stay), while keeping them when they are used in the Demographics sections, or at the Demographics of X articles.

We should have a discussion about substituting all of the "largest city" templates onto the country articles (or maybe turning them into wikitables instead of navboxes?), but there are dozens and dozens of them so the discussion should be combined, instead of the nominations of a handful today. — Goszei (talk) 00:46, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not advocating all of the Largest Cities templates to be deleted or merged. The ones that should be deleted are the ones that are unused or infrequently used, the ones that should be merged are the ones superseded by a navbox that has the same function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I am saying is that we should either: (1) keep all of the "largest city" template set, and narrowly use them each in one or two articles (i.e. in Germany and in Demographics of Germany), or (2) delete all of the "largest city" template set, and them substitute them into the country articles I just mentioned. I am not fully decided on which of these options are best, but I do not think we should delete/merge just a portion of them. — Goszei (talk) 01:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was a substantial discussion about converting these templates recently: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel. Based on this, the fix to the problems raised in that discussion could be as simple as just changing the template class? — Goszei (talk) 02:00, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the template class only changes a parameter and does not change the look or design of the template. -Catchpoke (talk) 22:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Two different templates with different purposes. One is used in the middle of articles to showcase lists of cities, and the other is used in articles about cities as a navigational template at the bottom. User:Catchpoke unsuccessfully nominated one of such templates a month ago already. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 02:08, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be a hypocrite! Your arguments there weren't even valid.--Catchpoke (talk) 03:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Do not merge. This is similar to the recently closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel, in which it was discussed that the "Largest cities of X" templates are not intended for use as end-article navboxes, but as in-article content. The two templates here are unrelated in purpose and use. The coding of the Largest Cities in X templates through navbox code is problematic, but this would be best covered as a whole rather than in individual nominations such as the Israel example and this one. However, where the Largest City in X template is being used as a navbox, it should be removed as redundant as noted in the nom. CMD (talk) 07:28, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Two different templates with different purposes.Moxy- 11:52, 6 July 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) 22:06, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Microsoft Windows operating systems (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to the broader ((Microsoft Windows family)). Elli (talk | contribs) 20:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It's almost an exact duplicate of the family template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:30, 26 June 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 keep. Izno (talk) 04:38, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Largest cities of the Philippines (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Most populous cities in the Philippines (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging The twenty cities in the Largest cities template are listed in the same order as in the Most populous navbox. The navbox includes more of the Philippines' largest cities by population. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:10, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge ((Largest cities of the Philippines)) into ((Most populous cities in the Philippines)) per nom and because ((Largest cities of the Philippines)) is an embedded list and is redundant to its WP:SAL. --Catchpoke (talk) 20:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not merge (for now). The "largest city" template set (see a list in the navbox at Template:Largest_cities_of_Germany) is rather widely used on country articles, like at Germany#Demographics. I think the solution right now is to remove the "largest city" templates from the city articles (where the "most populous city" box can stay), while keeping them when they are used in the Demographics sections, or at the Demographics of X articles.

We should have a discussion about substituting all of the "largest city" templates onto the country articles (or maybe turning them into wikitables instead of navboxes?), but there are dozens and dozens of them so the discussion should be combined, instead of the nominations of a handful today. — Goszei (talk) 00:46, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not advocating all of the Largest Cities templates to be deleted or merged. The ones that should be deleted are the ones that are unused or infrequently used, the ones that should be merged are the ones superseded by a navbox that has the same function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I am saying is that we should either: (1) keep all of the "largest city" template set, and narrowly use them each in one or two articles (i.e. in Germany and in Demographics of Germany), or (2) delete all of the "largest city" template set, and them substitute them into the country articles I just mentioned. I am not fully decided on which of these options are best, but I do not think we should delete/merge just a portion of them. — Goszei (talk) 01:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was a substantial discussion about converting these templates recently: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel. Based on this, the fix to the problems raised in that discussion could be as simple as just changing the template class? — Goszei (talk) 02:00, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the template class only changes a parameter and does not change the look or design of the template. -Catchpoke (talk) 22:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Two different templates with different purposes. One is used in the middle of articles to showcase lists of cities, and the other is used in articles about cities as a navigational template at the bottom. User:Catchpoke unsuccessfully nominated one of such templates a month ago already. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 02:08, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be a hypocrite! Your arguments there weren't even valid.Catchpoke (talk) 03:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Do not merge. This is similar to the recently closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel, in which it was discussed that the "Largest cities of X" templates are not intended for use as end-article navboxes, but as in-article content. The two templates here are unrelated in purpose and use. The Largest cities of the Philippines template is used for the Philippines article, whereas the Most populous cities in the Philippines navbox is used as a navbox for those cities. The coding of the Largest Cities in X templates through navbox code is problematic, and this is best discussed as a whole rather than in individual nominations such as the Israel example and this one. That said, it does appear that Largest cities of the Philippines is in many cases being used as a navbox template, which is indeed entirely redundant. However, in these cases it can simply be removed rather than needing to merge anything. CMD (talk) 07:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Two different templates with different purposes.Moxy- 11:54, 6 July 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 moved to draft space Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:08, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Nations at 2022 Mediterranean Games (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No point to having the template given that all of the links are red and this event hasn't happened yet. Can be recreated once the articles exist. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:10, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Can be recreated when the time comes. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:12, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify Much easier to move back from draftspace at the appropriate time than to recreate or to have to request undeletion. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:17, 24 June 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) 22:09, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Country data Mamluk Sultanate (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Country data Safavid Empire (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Country data Shah Ismail's Safavid Empire (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused and not apparently useful / working properly, compare to one that actually works like ((Country data Algeria)). Elli (talk | contribs) 20:00, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all Not useful. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The templates will be used in List of wars involving the Ottoman Empire and other places. I am currently editing in my sandbox before publishing
User:AaDIL123456789 AaDIL123456789 (talk) 22:07, 20 June 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 keep. Izno (talk) 04:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Largest cities of Myanmar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Most populous cities in Myanmar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Largest cities of Myanmar with Most populous cities in Myanmar. Largest cities only lists only ten cities as the latter lists fourteen and two cities on the template nominated, Hpa-an and Magway can be added onto the navbox. It's a case of two templates doing the same job. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:43, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge ((Largest cities of Myanmar)) into ((Most populous cities in Myanmar)) per nom and because ((Largest cities of Myanmar)) is an embedded list and is redundant to its WP:SAL -- Catchpoke (talk) 20:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not merge (for now). The "largest city" template set (see a list in the navbox at Template:Largest_cities_of_Germany) is rather widely used on country articles, like at Germany#Demographics. I think the solution right now is to remove the "largest city" templates from the city articles (where the "most populous city" box can stay), while keeping them when they are used in the Demographics sections, or at the Demographics of X articles.

We should have a discussion about substituting all of the "largest city" templates onto the country articles (or maybe turning them into wikitables instead of navboxes?), but there are dozens and dozens of them so the discussion should be combined, instead of the nominations of a handful today. — Goszei (talk) 00:46, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not advocating all of the Largest Cities templates to be deleted or merged. The ones that should be deleted are the ones that are unused or infrequently used, the ones that should be merged are the ones superseded by a navbox that has the same function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I am saying is that we should either: (1) keep all of the "largest city" template set, and narrowly use them each in one or two articles (i.e. in Germany and in Demographics of Germany), or (2) delete all of the "largest city" template set, and them substitute them into the country articles I just mentioned. I am not fully decided on which of these options are best, but I do not think we should delete/merge just a portion of them. — Goszei (talk) 01:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was a substantial discussion about converting these templates recently: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel. Based on this, the fix to the problems raised in that discussion could be as simple as just changing the template class? — Goszei (talk) 02:00, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the template class only changes a parameter and does not change the look or design of the template. -Catchpoke (talk) 22:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Two different templates with different purposes. One is used in the middle of articles to showcase lists of cities, and the other is used in articles about cities as a navigational template at the bottom. User:Catchpoke unsuccessfully nominated one of such templates a month ago already. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 02:08, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your rationales at that TfD were invalid and I offered to withdraw the nomination. Selfishness indeed.--Catchpoke (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Do not merge. This is similar to the recently closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel, in which it was discussed that the "Largest cities of X" templates are not intended for use as end-article navboxes, but as in-article content. The two templates here are unrelated in purpose and use. The coding of the Largest Cities in X templates through navbox code is problematic, but this would be best covered as a whole rather than in individual nominations such as the Israel example and this one. However, where the Largest City in X template is being used as a navbox, it should be removed as redundant as noted in the nom. CMD (talk) 07:28, 21 June 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 keep. Izno (talk) 04:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Largest cities of Japan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Most populous cities in Japan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Largest cities of Japan with Most populous cities in Japan as the latter is far more expansive than the former. There shouldn't be two templates for the same purpose. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:20, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge into ((Most populous cities in Japan)) per nom and because ((Largest cities of Japan)) is an embedded list and is redundant to its WP:SAL --Catchpoke (talk) 19:37, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not merge (for now). The "largest city" template set (see a list in the navbox at Template:Largest_cities_of_Germany) is rather widely used on country articles, like at Germany#Demographics. I think the solution right now is to remove the "largest city" templates from the city articles (where the "most populous city" box can stay), while keeping them when they are used in the Demographics sections, or at the Demographics of X articles.

We should have a discussion about substituting all of the "largest city" templates onto the country articles (or maybe turning them into wikitables instead of navboxes?), but there are dozens and dozens of them so the discussion should be combined, instead of the nominations of a handful today. — Goszei (talk) 00:46, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not advocating all of the Largest Cities templates to be deleted or merged. The ones that should be deleted are the ones that are unused or infrequently used, the ones that should be merged are the ones superseded by a navbox that has the same function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I am saying is that we should either: (1) keep all of the "largest city" template set, and narrowly use them each in one or two articles (i.e. in Germany and in Demographics of Germany), or (2) delete all of the "largest city" template set, and them substitute them into the country articles I just mentioned. I am not fully decided on which of these options are best, but I do not think we should delete/merge just a portion of them. — Goszei (talk) 01:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was a substantial discussion about converting these templates recently: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel. Based on this, the fix to the problems raised in that discussion could be as simple as just changing the template class? — Goszei (talk) 02:00, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the template class only changes a parameter and does not change the look or design of the template. -Catchpoke (talk) 22:49, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep ((Largest cities of Japan)) was nominated and kept in the past: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 July 1#Template:Largest cities of Japan. Two different templates with different purposes. One is used in the middle of articles to showcase lists of cities, and the other is used in articles about cities as a navigational template at the bottom. User:Catchpoke unsuccessfully nominated one of such templates a month ago already. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 02:08, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not merge. This is similar to the recently closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel, in which it was discussed that the "Largest cities of X" templates are not intended for use as end-article navboxes, but as in-article content. The two templates here are unrelated in purpose and use. The coding of the Largest Cities in X templates through navbox code is problematic, but this would be best covered as a whole rather than in individual nominations such as the Israel example and this one. However, where the Largest City in X template is being used as a navbox, it should be removed as redundant as noted in the nom. CMD (talk) 07:29, 21 June 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 Withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:33, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Osaka Metro Station Numbering (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Serving no purpose. Created by a permanently-blocked editor who made the Template:Tokyo Subway (TSSN) below this nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:12, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCleanerMan: please withdraw the nomination. The template has now been standardized with the other Japanese Station Numbering Templates, but as long as the WP:TFD notice is there it is completely unusable. TIA. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 00:11, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AlgaeGraphix, done. Glad you were able to create a use for it. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:29, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm recanting this nomination per the discussion right above. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:43, 21 June 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:05, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Tokyo Subway (TSSN) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused; created by a permanently-blocked editor. Also not a template but a list. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 17:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Serves no purpose. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:07, 20 June 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 keep. Izno (talk) 04:40, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Largest cities of Indonesia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Most populous cities in Indonesia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Proposing merging Largest cities of Indonesia with Most populous cities in Indonesia as both templates list the same number of cities, but Most populous cities in Indonesia has more cities listed and does the same job as the Largest cities template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge into ((Most populous cities in Indonesia)) per nom and because ((Largest cities of Indonesia)) is an embedded list and is redundant to its WP:SAL--Catchpoke (talk) 17:41, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've been notified of this nomination via my talk page.--Catchpoke (talk) 18:04, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And to make things clear, it's over our mutual concerns about these Largest cities of Templates. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:08, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Do not merge (for now). The "largest city" template set (see a list in the navbox at Template:Largest_cities_of_Germany) is rather widely used on country articles, like at Germany#Demographics. I think the solution right now is to remove the "largest city" templates from the city articles (where the "most populous city" box can stay), while keeping them when they are used in the Demographics sections, or at the Demographics of X articles.

We should have a discussion about substituting all of the "largest city" templates onto the country articles (or maybe turning them into wikitables instead of navboxes?), but there are dozens and dozens of them so the discussion should be combined, instead of the nominations of a handful today. — Goszei (talk) 00:46, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not advocating all of the Largest Cities templates to be deleted or merged. The ones that should be deleted are the ones that are unused or infrequently used, the ones that should be merged are the ones superseded by a navbox that has the same function. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I am saying is that we should either: (1) keep all of the "largest city" template set, and narrowly use them each in one or two articles (i.e. in Germany and in Demographics of Germany), or (2) delete all of the "largest city" template set, and them substitute them into the country articles I just mentioned. I am not fully decided on which of these options are best, but I do not think we should delete/merge just a portion of them. — Goszei (talk) 01:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was a substantial discussion about converting these templates recently: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel. Based on this, the fix to the problems raised in that discussion could be as simple as just changing the template class? — Goszei (talk) 02:00, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the template class only changes a parameter and does not change the look or design of the template.--Catchpoke (talk) 03:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Two different templates with different purposes. One is used in the middle of articles to showcase lists of cities, and the other is used in articles about cities as a navigational template at the bottom. User:Catchpoke unsuccessfully nominated one of such templates a month ago already. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 02:08, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What a deceitful statement for I am not the nominator!--Catchpoke (talk) 03:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Do not merge. This is similar to the recently closed Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 May 17#Template:Largest cities of Israel, in which it was discussed that the "Largest cities of X" templates are not intended for use as end-article navboxes, but as in-article content. The two templates here are unrelated in purpose and use. The coding of the Largest Cities in X templates through navbox code is problematic, but this would be best covered as a whole rather than in individual nominations such as the Israel example and this one. However, where the Largest City in X template is being used as a navbox, it should be removed as redundant as noted in the nom. CMD (talk) 07:29, 21 June 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 ((Egypt's largest cities by population)) and relist ((Largest cities of Egypt)) on 2021 July 1. Primefac (talk) 16:05, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Largest_cities_of_Egypt (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Egypt's_largest_cities_by_population (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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:40, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Peninsular War 1810 1811 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaignbox Peninsular War:1808 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaignbox Napoleon's invasion of Russia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1813 1814 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaign Austria 1809‎ (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaign Italy 1814 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaign Napoleon France 1814 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaign Sweden against Norway 1814 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaign Prussia 1806 1807 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaign Waterloo 1815 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaign low countries 1814 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Campaign north east France 1814 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:French invasion of russia mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:German campaign mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1807 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1808 1809 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1808 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1809 1810 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1809 1814 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1809 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1810 1812 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1811 1813 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Template:Peninsular War 1813 mobile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is a navbox fork of Template:Campaignbox Peninsular War (1810–1811) which is abusing the infobox class to try to bypass the normal mobile view settings related to all other navboxes. If contained conflicts are important to conflicts in general, I think they should be integrated in to Template:Infobox military conflict. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:07, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Nothing but a duplicate of the Campaginbox template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:44, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete If this is something that's desireable from a technical standpoint, this is something that should be decided upon in advance and the existing templates modified. Instead, one user has decided to remove existing templates and replace them with brand new templates to solve a perceived problem that may not even need solving. I don't know if it's desirable to make this into a bulk nomination of templates they've created or not? FDW777 (talk) 17:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This infobox is used for instance within Lines of Torres Vedras. The function "Pageviews" shows a daily average of 77 pageviews, 36 are mobile web(46%) and 39 are desktop(51%). The military navigation box "Napoleonic Wars" is used in the code of this page and I will use it for the quick comparison with the infobox as it behaves like a campaignbox. 97% of the users see the infobox and can use it. 51% see the campaignbox and can use it. 46% get no warning that something is missing and have no reason to switch to Wiki-Desktop mode. A lot of our mobile users does not even know about the existence of the "Desktop" button. If they use it for unknown reasons, the first impression of the article is that more than 40% of the display cannot be read or used as it is displayed too small, especially infoboxes. Do we have data about the usage of desktop mode on mobiles? I will never use it again because on a mobile in desktop mode neither infoboxes nor campaignboxes work in a satisfactory way. That implies that campaignboxes are usually not read or used on mobiles.

Answer to Delete 1: This infobox is a duplicate of the Campaignbox template in terms of content, but it nearly doubles the number of users who can actually read and use it in a very simple way.

Answer to Delete 2: The problem that 46% of the users do not see 100% of the article without any warning needs solving. One possible solution is this infobox.

Answer to Delete 3: The desktop mode is used as a fig leaf to hide the problems of the neglected mobile users that might be the main customers of wiki in the future.

Answer to Improve 1: Yes, there is a big problem and it needs a solution. The solution must be USABLE on a desktop AND a mobile. Just make a suggestion and I will try to replace the infobox with it. Then we can delete the infobox at once.

Ruedi33a (talk) 09:15, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is something you'd need to raise at the approriate place. I'm not entirely sure where, but I'm guessing the discussion you started at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) would be a good starting point. For whatever reason, the technical people don't want navboxes to display on mobiles. If you object to this, it's up to you to change the consensus. What you shouldn't have done is unilaterally created all these jerry rigged new templates designed to bypass the software. FDW777 (talk) 17:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As unwanted fork of Template:Campaignbox Peninsular War (1810–1811). Was going to nominate for deletion myself. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:54, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Improve the campaignboxes As the problem with the campaignboxes remain with mobile devices, someone have to do something, Infoboxes could be problematic, as it is not an unified criteria, but the problem with campaignboxes remain. Nuevousuario1011 (talk) 04:09, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Hawkeye7 and Nuevousuario1011: @FDW777, WikiCleanerMan, and Ruedi33a: I nominated just this one mostly as a test case - if there is strong consensus for removal/merging/etc I plan to also nominate the entire series of navboxes in disguise as secondary infoboxes (e.g. Template:Peninsular War 1807 mobile, Template:Peninsular War 1811 1813 mobile). If someone wants to add all of them to this discussion that's fine with me and I'd vote delete or at least merge in to the primary infobox type on them. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:21, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, add all of them to this discussion. @Xaosflux: what is a primary infobox type? Ruedi33a (talk) 15:01, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Ruedi33a: for example, Battle of Albuera already as an infobox, Template:Infobox military conflict. If you think this infobox should have support for additional parameters, such as related battles you could suggest improvements there. Personally, I don't think that putting that in there is great - but I don't really care. My primary nomination here is that we shouldn't be abusing the infobox class to disguise navboxes, resulting in multiple infoboxes on articles. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • Understood, thanks Ruedi33a (talk) 18:15, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Additional templates added. I believe they are all duplicates, although it's possible there might be some that aren't and may benefit from being converted into standard navigation boxes rather than outright deletion. If that is the case, please say which ones. FDW777 (talk) 15:17, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • Merge using a template:campainbox or a template:navbox makes no sense as they are not usable on a mobile. Ruedi33a (talk) 15:49, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I'd say the templates added should be deleted as well along with the first one that was nominated initially. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:04, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I change my vote to Merge into the existing Template:Infobox military conflict and used the parameter "notes". "Notes" is defined in the documentation as "notes – optional – optional field for further notes; this should only be used in exceptional circumstances." I have created a rough prototype in my sandbox and it works perfectly fine on notebooks, mobiles and tablets. Who decides whether these are "exceptional circumstances"? If not, where can I suggest improvements to Template:Infobox military conflict? Ruedi33a (talk) 18:54, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• If you want to merge ((Campaignbox Peninsular War (1810–1811))) (and presumably every other similar navbox) into ((Infobox military conflict)) then you'll need to tag all the relevent templates, and ideally start a new discussion to avoid this one being terminally compromised. FDW777 (talk) 07:20, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I want to merge all infoboxes disguised as campaignboxes into ((Infobox military conflict)) and I have tagged the first one. The others will follow. New discussion started in Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 22#Template:Campaign Austria 1809
    • The templates are all tagged for replacement and the new discussion is ready. This one can be closed. Ruedi33a (talk) 12:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • You misunderstand completely. This discussion is about the templates you created. If you believe the templates that already existed should be merged into the military conflict infobox, then start a new discussion for that. We are not having two different discussions relating to the same template, it's farcical to suggest there should be two simultaneous ongoing discussions where one proposal is to merge and the other is to delete. FDW777 (talk) 13:52, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • This should have been clear as I said If you want to merge ((Campaignbox Peninsular War (1810–1811))) (and presumably every other similar navbox). I was referring to the pre-existing templates, not your duplicate ones. FDW777 (talk) 14:09, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • OK, sorry, I totally misunderstood you. This discussion is not about the old campaignboxes that are not usable by mobile users. We discuss here the listed infoboxes that are usable by mobile users but violate Wiki rules. I want to delete them but first make the contained information available for mobile users. User:Xaosflux suggested to integrate them in to Template:Infobox military conflict. I agree and have created a prototype. Ruedi33a (talk) 15:01, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as an unnecessary fork of the campaignbox template. Navboxes were deliberately disabled by the developers in mobile view because they create bloated HTML and often don't work well on narrow screens. I don't think it's a good idea to bypass restrictions implemented by the developers by making navigation boxes out of infoboxes - If you want to display navboxes on mobile devices the correct route here is to put in a feature request on phabricator (or comment on one of the open ones), rather than making loads of forked templates. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 15:12, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• More than 40% of the wiki users are mobile users and they do not see any content provided by navboxes, campaignboxes, military navigation boxes...This is a big problem that seems to be ignored. In this case I have found a simple solution with the standard ((Infobox military conflict)). If agreed on I will migrate the content of the listed infoboxes and they can be deleted at once. Ruedi33a (talk) 16:19, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete because those templates are duplicated campaignbox templates. --2x2leax (talk) 18:30, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The campaignboxes not showing up on mobile is an issue, but creating poorly-formatted and duplicative templates is not the solution. The proper solution is going to require a good bit of back-end coding and probably some phabricator work. Hog Farm _Talk 20:23, 28 June 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 after adding corresponding parameter to the WPTV banner on each talk page Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Television needs synopsis (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

((WikiProject Television)) has |needs-synopsis=yes which does the same thing. There should never be a situation where ((Television needs synopsis)) is on a talk page but the project banner isn't. Current uses should be replaced with the mentioned parameter. See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 11#Template:Tvimage Gonnym (talk) 15:16, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/delete as per nom – template is redundant. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:19, 20 June 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 after adding corresponding parameter to the WPTV banner on each talk page Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Television needs response section (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

((WikiProject Television)) has |needs-response=yes which does the same thing. There should never be a situation where ((Television needs response section)) is on a talk page but the project banner isn't. Current uses should be replaced with the mentioned parameter. See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 11#Template:Tvimage Gonnym (talk) 15:16, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/delete as per nom – template is redundant (and they're called 'Reception' sections anyway...). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:20, 20 June 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 after adding corresponding parameter to the WPTV banner on each talk page Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Television needs production section (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

((WikiProject Television)) has |needs-production=yes which does the same thing. There should never be a situation where ((Television needs production section)) is on a talk page but the project banner isn't. Current uses should be replaced with the mentioned parameter. See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 11#Template:Tvimage Gonnym (talk) 15:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/delete as per nom – template is redundant. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:20, 20 June 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 after adding corresponding parameter to the WPTV banner on each talk page Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:34, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Television needs episode list (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

((WikiProject Television)) has |needs-episode-list=yes which does the same thing. There should never be a situation where ((Television needs episode list)) is on a talk page but the project banner isn't. Current uses should be replaced with the mentioned parameter. See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 11#Template:Tvimage Gonnym (talk) 15:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/delete as per nom – template is redundant. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:20, 20 June 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 after adding corresponding parameter to the WPTV banner on each talk page Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:34, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Television needs character section (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

((WikiProject Television)) has |needs-character=yes which does the same thing. There should never be a situation where ((Television needs character section)) is on a talk page but the project banner isn't. Current uses should be replaced with the mentioned parameter. See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 June 11#Template:Tvimage Gonnym (talk) 15:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/delete as per nom – template is redundant. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:21, 20 June 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 09:05, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Module:GetContent (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to Module:String and Module:Page (((#invoke:getContent|main|string|page)) -> ((#invoke:String|match|((#invoke:Page|getContent|page|as=raw))|string|plain=false))) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 12:44, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:45, 20 June 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).