- 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 merge to Template:Mark Millar. ✗plicit 23:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is the point in having a Millarworld-specific navbox, when the navbox about its creator ((Mark Millar)) covers the articles already, in addition to his other work? soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 20:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge with
((Mark Millar)), there's some articles in this new template that aren't in the Mark Millar template. Theooolone (talk) 02:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Theooolone. 209.151.151.155 (talk) 04:16, 21 February 2024 (UTC) – sock vote struck NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:54, 21 February 2024 (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.
Template:Death date 2024
- 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. ✗plicit 23:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unused and useless. Occidental𓍝Phantasmagoria [T/C] 23:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. 209.151.151.155 (talk) 04:17, 21 February 2024 (UTC) – sock vote struck NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]- Delete per nomination. Swimmer33 (talk) 14:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete per WP:G2 or WP:G6. We delete many of these every week. This is a typical editing test or error made by an editor who uses the wrong formatting and tries to fix it the wrong way. It happens. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:41, 21 February 2024 (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.
Uw meta templates
- 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 2024 February 27. ✗plicit 23:45, 27 February 2024 (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.
Template:NCAA Division I baseball ranking movements 2024
- 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 speedy deleted by Fastily (G7) (non-admin closure) Awesome Aasim 22:45, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This template was created to resolve an issue with Template:NCAA Division I baseball ranking movements. However, the issue with the non-year specific template has been resolved so the nominated template is a duplicate. It is not used on any season pages for college baseball teams. Swimmer33 (talk) 19:39, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Created under a good-faith misconception that a template fork was needed. See discussion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:45, 20 February 2024 (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.
Template:Blockquote paragraphs
- 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. ✗plicit 14:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This documentation is only used at Template:Blockquote. Since it's part of that documentation, it should be directly added to Template:Blockquote/doc instead of living in another different doc page. Subst it there and delete this page. Gonnym (talk) 12:40, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Subst and delete. Good catch. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Subst and delete. This dates to a time when there were multiple such templates transcluding the same documentation material, but this is no longer the case, so the stand-along doc fragment should be merged. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 13:33, 21 February 2024 (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.
Template:Swim first week
- 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. ✗plicit 23:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a really old template (created 2007) which is hyper-specific to a specific Wikiproject at a specific moment in time, and has been used less than 10 times with most recent uses being over a decade ago. I think it's extremely improbable that it will ever be used again. The user account that created it no longer exists. KRKwrites (talk) 03:38, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Subst and delete this talk page message. This should have been a subst-only template in the first place. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2024 (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.
Template:Sorting row
- 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 after replacing with ((sort under)) Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant to ((Sort under)). They work in different ways, so a redirect is not possible. However, this version just has fewer features. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:29, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Substitute then delete or redirect. ((Sorting row)) has limitations: no "unsortable", no "data-sort-type", and one alignment. I've heard it's difficult to use. It and the manual process add an accessibility issue, per the linked help page. ((Sort under)) solves the issue, difficulty, and limitations. A substitution is possible, so it can be redirected or deleted afterwards. Not sure if a delete is preferred since implementation differs? Jroberson108 (talk) 04:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Replace transclusions, then delete. Changed, didn't know replace was possible. Jroberson108 (talk) 04:19, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Substitute Replace with ((sort under)), then delete. No redirect. I do not want people using that template alias. It is not as simple as ((sort under)) and its matching class=sort-under. Is there some way to find pages using ((sorting row)) (or it aliases ((sort row)) and ((static row numbers arrows))) and data-sort-type= on the same page? That and the accessibility problem are the main issues with that template. The combination breaks the desired sorting. So I would like to see those pages corrected first. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @HouseBlaster and Timeshifter: I also would like to see the transclusions of ((sorting row)) replaced with ((sort under)) to fix the accessibility issue. I didn't mention it since it seems improbable due to one being added to a row and the other the table. Since "data-sort-type" can't be used with the old template, there is nothing that can be found. If "data-sort-type" was needed but not added due to the template's limitations, then the only solution I can think of is don't substitute and instead manually examine and change each transclusion, then delete the old template. Jroberson108 (talk) 16:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Jroberson108. People have added ((sorting row)) to tables that already had data-sort-type= in the table. The table continues to sort, but it sorts incorrectly. Editors just haven't noticed it since it is a subtle change. That's why I would like to find those tables first, and substitute ((sort under)). --Timeshifter (talk) 16:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Timeshifter: Can you provide a page link where this is done? I'm unaware of this type of usage. Based on that page, I might be able to do a regex search. Jroberson108 (talk) 16:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Jroberson108. It doesn't happen often since data-sort-type= is not needed often. Whenever I saw the problem I immediately fixed the problem by removing ((sorting row)). You could emulate it quickly in a sandbox by entering the problematic combination on a table created from the edit toolbar. We could just forget about it since it is not common. Eventually all usages of ((sorting row)) will be substituted, and that also solves the data-sort-type= problem too. --Timeshifter (talk) 17:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Is it possible to automate this change: [1] Rjjiii (talk) 21:59, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Timeshifter and Jroberson108: is there a reason you want to substitute this template? I was thinking we should replace all instances with ((sort under)). HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 22:51, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe substituting one template for the other is the same thing as replacing one with the other. --Timeshifter (talk) 05:01, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Timeshifter: they are different things. At TfD, when we say "substitute", we mean literal substitution (i.e. changing
((sorting row)) to ((subst:sorting row))). HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 19:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Rjjiii and HouseBlaster: I'm not too familiar with TfD possibilities. If it can be automated, then I'm all in. Jroberson108 (talk) 03:51, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jroberson108: at TfD, the possibilities are practically endless. Even if it could not be automated, that's what the WP:HOLDINGCELL is for. (Some things take gnomes years...) In this case, it can be done with WP:AWB. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 03:55, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 01:47, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Replace ((sorting row)) transclusions with ((sort under)), then delete
((sorting row)). The two are used differently, so no redirect. Jroberson108 (talk) 02:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Replace transclusions with ((sort under)), then delete. Agree with the above proposal. ((sorting row)) relies on a quirk of how sortable tables are handled by creating an empty row. This creates a blank row in the table for some screen readers and the mobile apps. ((sort under)) does not have these issues, offers positioning control, and allows non-sorting rows. There are no advantages of the older template, Rjjiii (talk) 04:10, 22 February 2024 (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 2024 February 27. ✗plicit 23:52, 27 February 2024 (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.