The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 14:37, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Forbes Fictional 15 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I really don't think that linking between fictional characters listed in a magazine is a useful navigation aid, especially seeing as the list isn't reproduced in the article due to a potential WP:COPYVIO[1]. --woodensuperman 15:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Izno (talk) 20:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Likely fails WP:CLIST. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, no reason to remove this long-time navbox. Nomination reasoning is "I don't like it" and not anything policy or guideline based. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:13, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• delete, appears to violate WP:CLIST. Frietjes (talk) 17:30, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If the list isn't in Forbes Fictional 15 then I don't see how a navigation template can be justified. Gonnym (talk) 11:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 23:34, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Unaffiliated synagogues in the United States (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Reform synagogues in the United States (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Reconstructionist synagogues in the United States (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Orthodox synagogues in the United States (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Humanistic synagogues in the United States (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Former synagogues in the United States (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Conservative synagogues in the United States (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The content of these navboxes already exist as categories such as Category:Conservative synagogues in the United States, and the navboxes do not have main articles. These navboxes, though clearly a painstaking effort to create, do not fit the purpose of a navbox, since the items in each of them are not tightly connected and interrelated. Specifically, the navbox content fails criteria 3, 4, and 5 at WP:NAVBOX. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, clearly better suited to category navigation per reasons given by nom. --woodensuperman 15:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Categories are not suitable for navigation, but neither are these navboxes. Delete per nom, and interested editors should listify the categories if intending to facilitate navigation in this topic area. Folly Mox (talk) 12:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retain as the contributing/establishing editor. The logic used to support deletion would also suggest that ((US presidents)), ((Jupiter)), ((Churches in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles)), and many many many more navigation boxes also should be deleted simply because there is a category that exists for these navigation boxes. If there was a more suitable reason for consideration, then let's discuss it, but not for the simple reason that a category also exists for a navigation box. Focusing specifically on the criteria listed at WP:NAVBOX where it has been claimed the navigation box does not meet:

Criteria 3:The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent.

The articles refer to each other in terms of the [insert rite of synagogue] and in some cases the articles also list/mention other synagogues of the same rite. Nevertheless, let's follow the same logic for ((US presidents)): would the article on Jimmy Carter mention Donald Trump or George Washington? Clearly not. It is not unreasonable, and there are many examples, of where a nav box supports a category. This is most especially the case where there is a narrow category. e.g. [Insert rite of Synagogue in insert name of state]. A broader approach is a nav box that covers [Insert rite of synagogue in inset name of country]. By way of example (and there are many), have a look at ((Synagogues in Croatia)).

Criteria 4:There should be a Wikipedia article on the subject of the template.

An article exists for Orthodox communities in the U.S.. For all the other nav boxes, with the exception of ((Former synagogues in the United States)), there is good coverage in [insert rite of Judaism]. Again, for example Reform Judaism#America and Classical Reform and also at Religion in the United States#Judaism provide good coverage without there being a detailed article on the nav box subject. Nevertheless, the nominator's point is worthwhile for consideration, bearing in mind that at WP:NAVBOX it states that good navboxes generally follow most or all of these guidelines (my emphasis on most).

Criteria 5:If not for the navigation template, an editor would be inclined to link many of these articles in the See also sections of the articles.

In fact, in most, if not all of the articles, there is a link to [insert rite of Judaism] in the See also section, which effectively links the articles. Again, using the ((US presidents)) example, not every president would be linked to every other president in the See also section. In these cases the nav box serves as a good link between articles on individual presidents; and the same reasoning applies for the above nav boxes as they link the synagogues in that rite.

If there are more reasonable matters to consider, sure, let's discuss them. Rangasyd (talk) 04:39, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• delete, better to use a list article and/or categories for this type of navigation. Frietjes (talk) 20:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 19:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Canadian premiers, 1860s (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions. It is unclear whether this large navbox, created in July 2023, is desirable in any articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:47, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template creator here. This particular template, only in mainspace for a couple days, is now transcluded in John A. Macdonald and should in theory be transcluded on all the pages of the linked politicians. This whole template family, with ((Canadian premiers, 1850s)) etc., has been through TfD before and survived for lack of consensus. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:01, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Please do not create a template and then make it other editor's work to place it on the correct pages. I personally view such templates cases as a "delete since even author doesn't care". Gonnym (talk) 17:46, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  With all due respect to the ethics of "making work for others", "delete since even author doesn't care" is quite established as not a valid deletion rationale. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 19:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  And yet, I see that essay, and I counter with WP:IFYOUDONTCAREWHYSHOULDWE. Gonnym (talk) 22:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I will not comment but to note the color of that link. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This is not really a good layout or use of a navbox. The individual navboxes for each office is sufficient. --woodensuperman 20:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as practically unused. Templates should be created for a specific usage that should be implemented right after creation. If after 4 months this wasn't used (until this TfD) on any article, and as of now, on only 1 article, there isn't any need for it. I also agree with Wooden that this isn't a good layout or use for a navbox. This seems much more like actual article content. Article content in navboxes is hidden on mobile which means that a large percent of our userbase cannot even see it. TL/DR: If this is content, add to article in a non-navbox style and not in the navbox area. Gonnym (talk) 12:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 15:01, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Jencarlos Canela (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only one album has an article. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 14:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 15:01, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Luann de Lesseps (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only three singles. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 14:17, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 November 8. ✗plicit 12:42, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Avatar:_The_Last_Airbender/sandbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.