Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< February 9 February 11 >

February 10[edit]

Template:Hindu Nationalism[edit]

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. ✗plicit 14:00, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indiscriminate collection of links; no systematic inclusion criteria for any of the categories herein. Also, Hindu nationalism is a broad topic that is not represent in this template; "Hindutva", the form of Hindu nationalism predominant today, is presumably what this refers to, but this isn't reflected in the scope either. Finally, created by a user indeffed as a sock. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:44, 3 February 2022 (UTC) *Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:07, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Striking my keep vote above. After taking a look at the following keep votes below my original vote and the template itself, the topic isn't as broad and just a random group of links connected by chance. The navbox should be reorganized and cleaned up to better present the subject at hand than direct deletion. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:31, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep If it is made by a sock, then it isn't supported but the template can be very useful in further purposes and the template gives a better scope of Hindutva and Hindu nationalism because there is no template for Hindutva or even Hindu Philosophy. Nadiallah (talk) 12:53, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There is one another template related to Hindu organizations (i.e. Sangh Parivar). But not all organizations or people are part of Sangh Parivar, so this template should not be deleted. Dshrm (talk) 07:37, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I support the latter one. It is true that the template gives a better scope of Hindutva and Hindu nationalism because there is no template for Hindutva or even Hindu Philosophy. It is a burning topic of India and Nepal. So, this should be kept. Organized template are to be kept. And further, why to delete a established template. What is the problem in keeping? Just hold this and end discussion. Nothing to worry on this matter.Krish edits675 (talk) 15:29, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:15, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The issue here is whether the WP:NAVBOX should exist or not, and I'm inclined to say it should. The issue of what the navbox contains is a different matter. Generally a long list of people doesn't work well. Remember the articles in the navbox should be "related" to Hindu Nationalism. Only include a person who is closely related to the topic. Worth considering the bi-directional principle: would you put this navbox in their article? If the answer is no, they probably shouldn't be in it. Nigej (talk) 07:07, 11 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).

Module:Adjacent stations/Abellio Rail NRW[edit]

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 speedy delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abellio Rail NRW is defunct and all usages replaced. Mackensen (talk) 14:37, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, which is the creator and sole editor. Gonnym (talk) 09:59, 11 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:United States presidential election voter turnout since 1828[edit]

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 13:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and superseded. Claims that "it is retained primarily for historical interest" but it's not at all obvious that that is true. Nigej (talk) 08:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both as unused. Voter turnout in United States presidential elections has many graphs which also indicate what type of voter the graph represents. Would make sense that if this was needed it would have been one of those by now. Gonnym (talk) 20:41, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To add Template:United States presidential election voter turnout timeline per discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:46, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Happy to have the other added. Both created by the same user on the same day (14 Nov 2020), who then made no effort to actually use them. Nigej (talk) 13:38, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No historical record claim can be supported nor has been used that would require such a designation or description. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:27, 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:National Wrestling Alliance Personnel[edit]

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 00:55, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This unused template has multiple issues. Firstly, it duplicates Template:National Wrestling Alliance which was made in 2007, compared to Template:National Wrestling Alliance Personnel in 2021. Secondly, the template name is misleading as the majority of the links are not people in the NWA. The personnel is instead at Template:National Wrestling Alliance personnel. Therefore, I don't think this template (National Wrestling Alliance Personnel) is needed as the personnel is covered in a different template and it's a duplicate of another earlier template. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:23, 10 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:RhodesFootball2007[edit]

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 11:10, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary template which lists the football teams that participated at the 2007 Island Games, a minor tournament. S.A. Julio (talk) 05:58, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:00, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not "related articles", just a list of countries. Nigej (talk) 07:53, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, not needed, minor tournament. GiantSnowman 07:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not needed. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:17, 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:Mohun Bagan AC 2019-20 squad[edit]

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 11:14, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Team no longer exists, as it has been replaced by ATK Mohun Bagan FC. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:02, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:02, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we don't keep squad templates for defunct sports teams. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:36, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, not needed - we do not keep historical, season specific templates, regardless of whether club is active or not. GiantSnowman 07:28, 11 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:Persepolis 2009/10 Squad Changes[edit]

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 11:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These tables are transcluded to a single article, 2009–10 Persepolis F.C. season. A template is not needed, the content should be substituted. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:04, 10 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:Portland Timbers 2 seasons[edit]

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:Portland Timbers seasons. ✗plicit 12:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox is not needed for a single season link, this could be merged into Template:Portland Timbers seasons. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:05, 10 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:Turkey A2 League topscorers[edit]

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 11:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The U21 Ligi is an youth reserve league, and is not part of the Turkish league system. A template for its top scorers is not needed. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:09, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:09, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's a fundamental aspect of a navbox that we need some content, in this case an article (or perhaps just a section) on Turkey A2 League topscorers. Nigej (talk) 08:14, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, not needed. GiantSnowman 07:29, 11 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:US1P[edit]

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 11:18, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary, template has not been updated in 11 years and the league does not seem to exist anymore. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:12, 10 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:USL-2[edit]

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 11:20, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The USL Second Division no longer exists, therefore this list of "current teams" is no longer necessary. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:14, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:14, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why can't defunct leagues have navboxes? BLAIXX 00:02, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Blaixx: Defunct leagues can have navboxes, but this template was used to list the current teams of the league, akin to {{Regionalliga West}}. Given the league is now defunct, a "current league member" navbox is not needed (there were over 100 clubs that played in the league during its existence). S.A. Julio (talk) 00:50, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification. Agree on delete now. BLAIXX 01:05, 11 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:VSLD1 Clubs[edit]

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 11:23, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template is being used to just call two other templates, {{Soccer in Australia}} and {{Football Federation Victoria}}. This 'middleman' is not needed and should be substituted. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:17, 10 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:Martyr's Memorial A-Division League1[edit]

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 11:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Given this template has not been updated in 15 years, it is probably not needed. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:19, 10 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:Liga Okręgowa Cuiavian-Pomeranian Group 2 2010-11[edit]

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 11:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template is for a very low league and has not been updated in 11 years. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:21, 10 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:2014 Division I men's soccer independents soccer records[edit]

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 11:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless standing table, there were no independent college teams in 2014. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:23, 10 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:2004 Russian Premier League medal squads[edit]

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 11:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is transcluded to a single article, 2004 Russian Premier League, and should be incorporated directly into the page. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:25, 10 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:1991–92 European Cup group stage map[edit]

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 11:30, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Separate map templates are not needed for the European Cup/Champions League, as they will only be used on the main article and group stage pages. Instead the map can be transcluded from the group stage article as is done with the group tables. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:36, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(creator) yeah fair enough sorry, wasn't sure how to display it on multiple pages without literally adding the full code twice, thought creating a template was the way but obviously not. Crowsus (talk) 22:54, 10 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).

2020 IPL match templates[edit]

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 11:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 9#2021 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) 06:37, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not needed, for same reasons as the 2021 IPL templates listed yesterday. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:12, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per nominator.Fade258 (talk) 16:17, 10 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:Calcio a 5 Acqua e Sapone[edit]

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 11:36, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We do not use shortcut link templates per past discussions and this TfD. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:44, 10 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:2012 FIFA Club World Cup finalists[edit]

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 11:56, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Finalist" templates are typically created for major national team tournaments, for example {{2018 FIFA World Cup finalists}}. However, such templates are not needed for annual club competitions, this would be overkill for the hundreds of such tournament editions that exist. S.A. Julio (talk) 06:53, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all They fundamentally fail WP:NAVBOX which says that a navbox is "a grouping of links used in multiple related articles to facilitate navigation between those articles" The main content of these is a list of club articles, which are not "related articles". It's only the "below" sections that are "related" and these don't have enough links in that section to justify a navbox (often there's not as many "below" articles as you might think, since some are combined or sections of other articles). Nigej (talk) 07:13, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as per Nigej. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, not needed. GiantSnowman 07:32, 11 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:2021 U.S. Open Cup qualifying table (MLS)[edit]

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 11:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template is only used on a single article, 2021 U.S. Open Cup qualification, and should be substituted. S.A. Julio (talk) 07:01, 10 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:Sent off-s1[edit]

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 12:39, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These templates provide an unnecessary amount of detail and are only used on two Crewe Alexandra season articles. Should be replaced with the standard {{sent off}} template. Similar templates were previously deleted here, here and here. S.A. Julio (talk) 07:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 07:11, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per the previous discussions noted. This sort of detail is generally not noteworthy. Nigej (talk) 07:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all and replace uses with the standard template for this. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:14, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, not needed. GiantSnowman 07:32, 11 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).

FBA templates 1903 to 1926[edit]

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 12:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a follow-up to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 December 17#Template:FBA 1927 and Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 1#FBA templates 2003 to 2018 where articles in the same series, from 1927 to 2018, were deleted. The list excludes those elected in 1902, the founding fellows, who may be a notable group. The arguments for deleting the current list are exactly the same. They fail much of WP:NAVBOX. The fellows elected in a particular year have nothing really in common, no more so than any other arbitrary grouping of the fellows. Articles for one fellow almost never mention those elected in the same year. We have a series of lists List of fellows of the British Academy elected in the 1910s etc and a detailed category structure at Category:Fellows of the British Academy which are more than adequate. Nigej (talk) 07:43, 10 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).

Tennis players[edit]

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 reformat to match the standard like {{Kobe Bryant}}, {{Tiger Woods}}, {{Babe Ruth}}, ... Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion review#Template:Martina Navratilova, Template:Naomi Osaka, Template:Chris Evert and Template:Bob and Mike Bryan (closed) had a consensus that these templates need to be discussed a bit more. This is a procedural nomination; I am neutral. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:55, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment See Category:Wikipedia categories named after tennis players for an approximate list of what I would regard as "related articles" for these players. Personally I'm happy to have navboxes for these. My only concern is to get rid of the career-summary style and return to something along the lines of {{Kobe Bryant}}, {{Tiger Woods}}, {{Babe Ruth}} etc. A WP:NAVBOX is simply "a grouping of links used in multiple related articles to facilitate navigation between those articles in Wikipedia". Nigej (talk) 13:04, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Since I was the original nominator that resulted in the deletion review. I'd support changing the templates to navigate between articles directly related to the subjects, as any navbox should be, then being decorative as they currently are. But if they are not, then deletion would have to be granted again. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:22, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the above. Remove the career-level detail - that should be in the player's article itself. Remove people they've played with - that shouldn't be added to navboxes. Eventually, a result like Template:Kobe Bryant should be the goal. Gonnym (talk) 09:44, 17 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).

2018 IPL final templates[edit]

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 12:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All single-use templates for scores in the 2018 Indian Premier League Final article. Should be substed there and deleted. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:32, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete per nom. single-use article content. Nigej (talk) 12:02, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per nom. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:27, 11 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).

IPL Road to the final templates[edit]

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 12:22, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Single use templates for 2019 Indian Premier League Final, 2020 Indian Premier League Final and 2021 Indian Premier League Final, should be substed there as appropriate and then deleted. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:37, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete per nom. single-use article content. Nigej (talk) 12:05, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per nom. Fade258 (talk) 12:48, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 20:27, 11 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:Indian Premier League results[edit]

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 12:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, and outdated. Don't see a valid template use for this, as already covered in correct places such as List of Indian Premier League seasons and results without this template Joseph2302 (talk) 11:41, 10 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:2021 LPL Road to the final[edit]

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 speedy delete per author request. ✗plicit 13:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only valid use is 2021 Lanka Premier League Final, so should be substed there and then deleted Joseph2302 (talk) 12:07, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete per nom. single-use article content. Nigej (talk) 12:16, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Hi @Joseph2302: and @Nigej: this template was created by me so can I copy the content from this template and paste it into the respective place and then I will tag it as a CSD of author deletion request. Is it ok? Hope for your positive response. Thank you ! Fade258 (talk) 12:23, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Fine with me. Quicker that way. Nigej (talk) 12:34, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds good to me too. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:06, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok then I will do that. Fade258 (talk) 13:08, 10 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:Infobox EuroBasket Israel[edit]

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 13:23, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two templates that link between literally nothing. We long ago got rid of these types of template wrappers, never mind the fact that these a) aren't used, and b) don't allow for any navigation. Primefac (talk) 13:22, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it...I am the page creator, didn't realize it still existed. It used to link to pages that have been deleted. - Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 15:12, 11 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:Gun laws by US state[edit]

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 14:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sidebar mainly consisting of a clickable map. See Talk:Gun laws in Georgia from 2013 where it is discussed. Nigej (talk) 14:29, 10 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:Greater Manchester bus route 17[edit]

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 14:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused route maps. Greater Manchester bus route 17 has been WP:BLARed, while the other has been deleted: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greater Manchester bus route 84 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nigej (talk • contribs) 14:45, 10 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:Graph:USL Championship clubs timeline[edit]

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 14:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused timeline of clubs in this soccer league. USL Championship#Timeline doesn't use it. Nigej (talk) 15:03, 10 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:GAA counties of Ireland imagemap[edit]

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 14:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused map of the Irish county Gaelic Athletic Association articles. Nigej (talk) 15:11, 10 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:Soccer Bowl (NASL Championship)[edit]

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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Soccer Bowl (NASL Championship) with Template:North American Soccer League (1968–1984) and Template:Soccer Bowl (NASL 2011) with Template:North American Soccer League (2011–2017).
Templates are not necessary to list the winners of every national club competition, for example we don't have Template:Premier League champions. The links to the Soccer Bowl should be merged with Template:North American Soccer League (1968–1984) and Template:North American Soccer League (2011–2017). S.A. Julio (talk) 16:15, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --dashiellx (talk) 17:03, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, although we should remove the champions as they simply link back to the team articles. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:31, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per nom. BLAIXX 23:59, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per nom. GiantSnowman 07:33, 11 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).

Non-medaling Basketball squad navboxes 2[edit]

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) 23:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a follow-up to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 3#Non-medaling Basketball squad navboxes with a further list of squad templates for non-medaling Basketball teams. As noted there, previous consensus was that this sort of template should be restricted to medal winning teams. Nigej (talk) 16:20, 10 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:HS chordophones[edit]

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) 23:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused old-fashioned sidebar from 2008 relating to Hornbostel–Sachs classification system. Various navboxes are used instead. Nigej (talk) 17:40, 10 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:Current long-term[edit]

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) 23:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Template:Current long-term (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
  • Delete Template is unused. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:31, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It appears that this template was created for use during hurricane seasons. There are plenty of "season" articles like baseball seasons, football seasons, election campaigns, and more that are "current long-term" events, but they do not appear to be tagged in any special way. What makes hurricane seasons different in a way that would make this template useful enough to place it at the top of a season article? – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:40, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep Category:Current events is in Category:Wikipedia categories sorted by month, which means AnomieBOT will create monthly categories and will look in articles in the base category for the templates that need a |date= added. Direct uses of such categories make AnomieBOT re-scan the relevant articles on each edit, and occasionally I go through the bot's report and clean them up.
    But there are some articles, mainly hurricane seasons, where people want an article in the current events category but don't want the banner added by {{Current}}. If this template is deleted, what would you suggest to people who have that use case? I'd like a good answer to link to. Anomie⚔ 20:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones#Inclusion of season articles in Category:Current events. Anomie⚔ 20:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect that coding for this need could be done in {{Infobox tropical cyclone season}} with a new parameter and an automatic category, along with error tracking so that season articles' "current" attributes don't get too stale. I added some detail at the talk page linked above. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:00, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Something of a contradiction of terms. If its "current", tag it so, If its long term, don't tag it. Do we tag the baseball season as "current"? or a thousand other seasons? Nigej (talk) 20:02, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commment As a tropical cyclone editor, I do not see the need for our season articles to be tagged with a template reminding readers that it is a current season.Jason Rees (talk) 21:32, 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:IFFHS All-time Men's Dream Team[edit]

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) 23:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused duplicate of {{IFFHS All-time Men's World Dream Team}}. Nigej (talk) 18:58, 10 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:IrishFootballAID[edit]

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) 23:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Templates related to the short lived "Irish football improvement drive" from 2007. No prospect of reuse. Nigej (talk) 19:59, 10 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:Afdls[edit]

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) 23:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Used in only ten AFD pages back in 2016 and 2017. Appears to be an abandoned experiment. No incoming discussion links. Recommend subst and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:01, 10 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:Kingdom of Thiruvithamkoor[edit]

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) 23:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unused duplicate of {{Kingdom of Travancore}}. Nigej (talk) 20:06, 10 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:Pelé series[edit]

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 now that it has been reformatted as a navbox Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:18, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Creator attempted to add this sidebar to the Pelé article but was reverted, so now unused. Nigej (talk) 20:32, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Nigej, can you provide a link to the edit revision? --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Was reverted here: [1] "little content in that series. No need at this point" Nigej (talk) 20:46, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep/Convert This is useful in my mind as there are articles related to the subject of Pele. Convert to a navbox. I think the little content remark was probably for the sidebar, not necessarily in relation to the main article for Pele. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. S.A. Julio (talk) 21:01, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and convert per WCM. GiantSnowman 21:51, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This type of template looks rather useful, not sure what the convert above is. I don't think it should be trashed. Govvy (talk) 14:54, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It means turn it into a navbox. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:52, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Convert to a bottom navbox and not as a sidebar. Gonnym (talk) 09:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep, I have taken a first pass at converting it to a navbox. Frietjes (talk) 19:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good - this should be renamed as {{Pelé}} and kept. GiantSnowman 21:26, 17 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:Massive Registered Editor lv2 Ribbon[edit]

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) 23:22, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template duplicates {{Registered Editor Ribbon}} except for the size, which could be added as an option to that template if someone really wants a giant editor ribbon like this. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:41, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP:People might not know that and/or want to have to do all of that@Jonesey95 Starship SN20 (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not sure what purpose it could serve. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Just more pointless templates. Nigej (talk) 21:32, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Editors should start learning to use parameters. If using |size= is too hard for them, then I have major doubts about their others edits. Gonnym (talk) 09:50, 17 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:More links section[edit]

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 speedy delete. Creator has admitted mistake, so I'm treating this as a WP:G7. Primefac (talk) 21:35, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicates {{Underlinked|section}}. This would be eligible for speedy T3 if it had not been eliminated, so TFD it is. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:16, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (page creator) i SWEAR i turned that into a redirect after realizing, but apparently I left it behind through another title. Lallint⟫⟫⟫Talk 21:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom & Lallint IAmChaos 21:21, 10 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:Theology Sidebar[edit]

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 userfy. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copy of {{Shinto}}. This may be eligible for speedy deletion, but I don't see an exact match in the criteria. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:20, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: I am working on making it into something else. This is my first template so I'm not really sure what to do and just grabbed a template that looked similar to what I wanted to start MaitreyaVaruna (talk) 21:48, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, sorry if this nomination is a little bitey. I recognize that it was created very recently. If you get it tidied up and find an article to put it into within a week, this nomination will be closed as "Keep" and you will have nothing to worry about. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:51, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy so the editor can work on it as their own pace. Gonnym (talk) 11:16, 13 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:Dates of Easter[edit]

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 Result was speedy deletion. As stated below, a recreation of a page deleted at a previous deletion discussion. JBW (talk) 12:03, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, incoming links, documentation, or categories. Possible recreation of a deleted template (I can't see deleted page content). – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:23, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete From what I remember this is an almost exact recreation of the previously deleted one. Nigej (talk) 06:05, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've speedy this as G4 as this is exactly the same template, created right after it was previously deleted, by the same editor who brought it to deletion review. Gonnym (talk) 09:55, 11 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:Taxonomy/Pentecopterus/doc[edit]

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) 02:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions. Page has been blank for four years. These semi-automated taxonomy pages have their own built-in documentation in the form of links to pages that explain how they work. They do not use /doc pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - @Jonesey95: - As OA, no problem whatsoever - *entirely* ok with me to delete asap - hope this helps in some way - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 23:54, 10 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:Team flag location[edit]

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) 14:52, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions, no documentation. No substantive edits since 2012. The only incoming links are from discussion pages where editors are advising against the creation and use of this template, as far as I can tell. It is unclear how this template might be used, given its lack of both use and documentation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:44, 10 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:CiteSeerX/doc[edit]

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) 14:51, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced by the centralized {{Catalog lookup docs}} in 2021. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:03, 10 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2022_February_10&oldid=1072475541"