Template talk:Conv

Delete?
Uses of this template redirect are being changed with the edit comment clean $(${convert$)$}; redirect Template:Conv is deprecated as it is not useful yet causes confusion. If the template should not be used, and there are no remaining uses, then should it just be deleted? — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 13:28, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 13:33, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry to light up watchlists when I replaced conv with convert (sometimes with other convert cleanup) in 56 articles. I do that because people often copy what they see. That leads to confusion because is used over 3.2 million times in articles and most editors are used to it, and those that aren't can at least guess what it is doing. The conv abbreviation is a trivial saving but it wastes time because other editors have to wonder what it is, and whether it is different from convert, and which "should" be used. There is the added confusion that cvt is a widely used abbreviation for convert which also sets   to show unit symbols, not names. By contrast, conv does nothing extra.Regarding whether this template should be deleted, the ideal answer is yes, but the pragmatic situation is that deletion is unlikely because people at WP:RFD strongly follow the advice on that page. Because conv is "not harmful" (wasting time is not considered to be a problem) and is not new, I wouldn't bother trying to get it deleted. Johnuniq (talk) 22:17, 12 October 2021 (UTC)