< February 11 February 13 >

February 12

Template:Wide template

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) 15:57, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Transcluded in nine pages. Not widely used. Should subst and delete. George Ho (talk) 07:28, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:50, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:16, 12 February 2022 (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).

Top ten male singles tennis players 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 no consensus. Primefac (talk) 09:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a follow-up to WT:TENNIS#"Top ten" lists and Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 January 27#Top ten male doubles tennis players templates and includes the top 10 ranking templates for male singles. The issues relating to these are similar to those mentioned in the earlier discussions noted. Nigej (talk) 08:18, 5 February 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 20:21, 12 February 2022 (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).

Big 12 Conference 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. ✗plicit 03:44, 19 February 2022 (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:Mathis Gamme songs

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 13:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Red-linked template of someone who isn't notable. If this gets deleted Category:Mathis Gamme and Category:Mathis Gamme songs can be deleted as well G8. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:05, 12 February 2022 (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:Daet, Camarines Norte Barangay

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. Liz Read! Talk! 03:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 10:56, 12 February 2022 (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:Salten Commuter Rail

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. Liz Read! Talk! 03:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. No main article for this navbox, and the one linked article in the navbox body does not mention this rail line. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:45, 12 February 2022 (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:Salten Commuter Rail map

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. Liz Read! Talk! 03:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Rail routemap for an article that does not exist. The one linked station does not mention this rail line. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:51, 12 February 2022 (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:Slovak Government approval

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 15:00, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links. Created in mid-2021. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:03, 12 February 2022 (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:WHO LEM

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 15:00, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, categories, or incoming links. Created in March 2021. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As the original author, I'm not contending this (for now). If it's important enough, I may re-add it later.
Riventree (talk) 18:31, 12 February 2022 (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:Nevada Wolf Pack football navbox/doc

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) 15:27, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doc page for ((Nevada Wolf Pack football navbox)). However that template doesn't use it, these fancy features having been removed in 2011. Nigej (talk) 17:42, 12 February 2022 (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:Portal-mobile

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 merge to Template:Portal. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:46, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Portal-mobile with Template:Portal.
Now that Template:Portal is visible on mobile devices, Template:Portal-mobile is a redundant template with a different style. Let's redirect uses back to Template:Portal — hike395 (talk) 18:09, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge templates. If Template:Portal indeed now works on mobile then there is no need for two separate templates and CSS would probably be the way to handle mobile vs desktop style. Gonnym (talk) 07:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Portal has a frame

Template:Portal-mobile does not have a frame

@Northamerica1000: I can add |border= to Template:Portal and Module:Portal, similar to Template:Portal bar. Then |border=no would turn off the border. Template:Portal-mobile can then become a thin wrapper around Template:Portal, just for existing articles. New uses can be directed to Template:Portal. This would be cleaner than maintaining two templates and modules. — hike395 (talk) 09:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Hike395: That sounds fine as well, and easier. Just to be crystal clear, it seems imperative that portal links using the standard portal template will retain their borders, and the |border=no would be an optional parameter to remove it if desired. This sounds exactingly as you are saying above, but I just want to make sure. If portals links were to suddenly lose their borders en masse, people would likely complain. North America1000 16:17, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Northamerica1000: To clarify, the default will be |border=yes, so that the millions of portal boxes will remain unchanged. — hike395 (talk) 23:45, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Hike395: That works for me; just wanted to be crystal clear about it. Your solution relative to my proposal to provide a no-border option for editors solves this matter and provides the no-border option. North America1000 23:53, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Module:Portal and Template:Portal now have |border=, and Template:Portal-mobile calls Module:Portal with |border=no. I'll wait to do any deprecation until this discussion closes. — hike395 (talk) 03:18, 16 February 2022 (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:Netball at the Commonwealth Games category navbox

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 23:46, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A template for navigating between groups of netball "convenience templates" in different years. Only used for 2006. Later games used different category structures so this approach was unsuitable. Nigej (talk) 18:39, 12 February 2022 (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).

2019 IPL match 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. ✗plicit 23:46, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 9#2021 IPL match templates, Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 10#2020 IPL match templates and other discussions noted there, these templates have been substituted into the main article and they are no longer required. Nigej (talk) 19:23, 12 February 2022 (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:2009 NCAA Division I FCS independents football standings/doc

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) 15:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused doc page. Could be added to the parent but all the articles I looked at in Category:2009 NCAA Division I FCS standings templates and Category:NCAA Division I FCS football independents standings templates don't have doc pages, so seems better to delete Nigej (talk) 19:49, 12 February 2022 (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:2010 MEAC football standings/doc

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 move. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:30, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doc page for ((2010 MEAC football standings)) now renamed ((2010 Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference football standings)). However that template doesn't use it, the highlighting feature having been removed in 2010. Other years don't have doc pages. Nigej (talk) 19:58, 12 February 2022 (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:2011 MEAC football standings/doc

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 move. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doc page for ((2011 MEAC football standings)) now renamed ((2011 Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference football standings)). That template doesn't use it. Other years don't have doc pages so seems better to delete. Nigej (talk) 19:59, 12 February 2022 (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:NYCS time

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 23:50, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Was TfDed here Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 September 4#Template:NYCS time but there wasn't a single comment. Time for another go. See ((NYCS)) which says "((NYCS)) is a universal template intended to replace older NYCS templates such as ((NYCS time))" and it's said that since 2007. Nigej (talk) 20:18, 12 February 2022 (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:Pentecostal European Fellowship

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 23:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fails most things about a navbox. No parent article, hardly any links. Nigej (talk) 22:07, 12 February 2022 (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).
More