Unused s-line 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 23:22, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unused s-line templates. --Gonnym (talk) 21:45, 7 June 2023 (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. Izno (talk) 23:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No transclusions after replaced with ((YYYY in sport category header)). Also delete the corresponding template navbox that is not useful anymore as none of the templates exist. –Aidan721 (talk) 18:47, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. These category header templates were all designed to be parameterless, to avoid errors. ((YYYY in sport category header)) needs a param, which risks error or inconsistency.
@Aidan721: Replacing all uses of a template before nominating it for deletion is not good practice, because it removes the option of keeping the status quo ante. Please restore the status quo ante pending discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:01, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @BrownHairedGirl: I've addressed your concerns by creating ((Get parent sport)) which will automatically find the parent sport (in this example: cycle racing) for BMX, mountain biking, etc. So parameters are no longer required for those categories. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:27, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, @Aidan721. Does it support multiple parents? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:41, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, currently 2. Will be going through the different sports and updating the template. –Aidan721 (talk) 19:43, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete may have been better to discuss/explain before acting and replacing, but it looks like those concerns have been addressed based on the conversation above and this is now an unused and superseded template. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 04:07, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]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:Bulgarian princesses by marriage
- 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 2023 June 19. Primefac (talk) 09:06, 19 June 2023 (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. Izno (talk) 23:07, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No transclusions. –Aidan721 (talk) 17:16, 7 June 2023 (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:Deutsche Bahn style
- 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 Speedied G7. (non-admin closure) – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 17:54, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unused rail transport style template. Gonnym (talk) 16:57, 7 June 2023 (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:List of Portland, Oregon sports teams
- 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) 23:08, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No transclusions in mainspace. Transclusions to user articles haven't been updated in 6 years. –Aidan721 (talk) 13:58, 7 June 2023 (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. Izno (talk) 23:11, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Only links 2 articles other than the main. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 13:37, 7 June 2023 (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:Novae
- 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) 13:49, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In Category:Novae, there are 121 possibly qualifying articles about individual novae or nova-like objects, too many for a navbox. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:33, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. WP:NENAN, and this one in particular is impossible to maintain. -fuzzy510 (talk) 09:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:34, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Repurpose into a navbox for novae types, physics, and the list articles, ((Nova)) being occupied by a comics topic (that should be located at ((Nova Corps)) but isn't) leaving this plural form as the one for astronomy. -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 06:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I have unilaterally moved that template and will soon update all transclusions. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Overall, that souds like a good replacement for this template, like the (widely misused) Template:Exoplanet which contains no specific exoplanets. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:42, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- So, you mean delete the existing one and re-create a template with the same (or subtly different?) name, different content, and used on different pages? I think it would be simpler for consensus just to say "delete" and then get on with creating a new one afterwards. Or is it just a play for keeping a template with a list of individual novae and a few other things as well? See ((supernovae)), for a comparable idea with a "notable" section containing a list of some, but far from all, supernova articles. Lithopsian (talk) 13:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, any novae articles would necessarily have a see also section to nova topics, for which the new version of ((novae)) would serve, linking to the physics of novae. So the transclusions would be kept, and more transclusions added for the various physics and types articles. The template itself could be stripped to the most notable examples of novae per ((supernovae)) or entirely removed per ((exoplanet)). If we only strip back to the most notable examples, then it isn't a complete overwrite replacement, rather a mostly complete rewrite. -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 20:47, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:44, 7 June 2023 (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 relisted on 2023 June 14. Izno (talk) 03:03, 14 June 2023 (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).