Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell

If process guidelines are met, move templates to the appropriate subsection here to prepare to delete. Before deleting a template, ensure that it is not in use on any pages (other than talk pages where eliminating the link would change the meaning of a prior discussion), by checking Special:Whatlinkshere for '(transclusion)'. Consider placing on the template page.

Tools
There are several tools that can help when implementing TfDs. Some of these are listed below.
 * Template linking and transclusion check – Toolforge tool to see which pages are transcluded but not linked from or to a template
 * WhatLinksHereSnippets.js – user script that allows for template use to be viewed from the Special:WhatLinksHere page
 * AutoWikiBrowser – semi-automatic editor that can replace or modify templates using regular expressions
 * Bots – robots editing automatically. All tasks have to be approved before operating. There are currently five bots with general approval to assist with implementing TfD outcomes:
 * AnomieBOT – substituting templates via User:AnomieBOT/TFDTemplateSubster
 * SporkBot – general TfD implementation run by Plastikspork
 * PrimeBOT – general TfD implementation run by Primefac
 * BsherrAWBBOT – general TfD implementation run by Bsherr
 * PearBOT II – general TfD implementation run by Trialpears

Closing discussions
The closing procedures are outlined at Templates for discussion/Closing instructions.

To review
Templates for which each transclusion requires individual attention and analysis before the template is deleted.



To merge
Templates to be merged into another template.

Infoboxes

 * Merge into the singular infobox ship (currently a redirect):
 * I have hacked Module:Infobox ship which implements ship infoboxen without the external wikitable that the above templates require. Uses Module:Infobox; is no longer required; parameter names are changed from sentence- to snake-case; section header height for career, characteristics, service record sections is normalized; custom fields are supported.  I chose to retain the individual section templates as subtemplates:
 * – Module:Infobox ship implements only the 'ship' portion of
 * In the main infobox these subtemplates are called with the section&lt;n> parameters (aliases of data&lt;n>).
 * Comparisons between wikitable infoboxen and Module:Infobox ship infoboxen can bee seen at my sandbox (permalink).
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Since the intent is to use Module:Infobox directly, why is Module:Infobox ship being used to generate the infobox? I can understand if there is need for a backend module to validate a value or something, but is there really a reason to have this unique code? Gonnym (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The original complaint was that the ship infoboxen templates are table templates masquerading as infobox templates. None of those templates use Module:Infobox.  Module:Infobox ship answers that complaint.  Yeah, we still have subtemplates, but, in my opinion, that is a good thing because the appropriate parameters and their data are contained in each particular subtemplate.  The container subtemplates make it relatively easy for an editor reading an article's wikitext to understand.  The current ship infobox system allows sections in any order (except for the position of  – not needed with Module:Infobox ship); whatever the final outcome of this mess, that facility must not be lost.
 * Module:Infobox ship does do some error checking (synonymous parameters ship_armor / ship_armour, ship_draft / ship_draught, ship_honors / ship_honours, and ship_stricken / ship_struck). Whether  directly calls Module:Infobox or whether  calls Module:Infobox ship which then calls Module:Infobox is really immaterial so long as the final rendered result is a correctly formatted infobox.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:06, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Trappist the monk are you still interested in working on this Module? If not, I'd like to try to get it finished myself. The massive deviation I had in mind was to make one invocation of the module do everything. Each page will require individual attention to complete the merge into a proper infobox anyway, so I reason to go the extra mile to make it nicer in general. Repeatable parameters will have the normal n number appended to the end of the parameter. An alternative would be to have subboxes for repeating sections, which would be easier in general to replace and implement. SWinxy (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, but I don't think that this page is the proper place to discuss. Choose some place more proper and let me know where that is?
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:58, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Replacement with Infobox aircraft:
 * &rarr; Infobox aircraft
 * &rarr; Infobox aircraft
 * For Infobox aircraft engine, There is an ongoing discussion about whether the aircraft engine Infobox should be merged with the Infobox aircraft or not. Except for the engine Infobox, other Infoboxes can be orphaned and there are no objection for that. Prarambh20 (talk) 22:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * This discussion is still ongoing, so I have moved it back to the "to merge" list with the others. Primefac (talk) 10:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The discussion has now ended (diff), with the consensus NOT TO MERGE Infobox aircraft engine with the others. However infobox aircraft begin may or may not end up being merged into Infobox aircraft engine. The template pages should be updated accordingly. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Module:Infobox ship does do some error checking (synonymous parameters ship_armor / ship_armour, ship_draft / ship_draught, ship_honors / ship_honours, and ship_stricken / ship_struck). Whether  directly calls Module:Infobox or whether  calls Module:Infobox ship which then calls Module:Infobox is really immaterial so long as the final rendered result is a correctly formatted infobox.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:06, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Trappist the monk are you still interested in working on this Module? If not, I'd like to try to get it finished myself. The massive deviation I had in mind was to make one invocation of the module do everything. Each page will require individual attention to complete the merge into a proper infobox anyway, so I reason to go the extra mile to make it nicer in general. Repeatable parameters will have the normal n number appended to the end of the parameter. An alternative would be to have subboxes for repeating sections, which would be easier in general to replace and implement. SWinxy (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, but I don't think that this page is the proper place to discuss. Choose some place more proper and let me know where that is?
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:58, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Replacement with Infobox aircraft:
 * &rarr; Infobox aircraft
 * &rarr; Infobox aircraft
 * For Infobox aircraft engine, There is an ongoing discussion about whether the aircraft engine Infobox should be merged with the Infobox aircraft or not. Except for the engine Infobox, other Infoboxes can be orphaned and there are no objection for that. Prarambh20 (talk) 22:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * This discussion is still ongoing, so I have moved it back to the "to merge" list with the others. Primefac (talk) 10:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The discussion has now ended (diff), with the consensus NOT TO MERGE Infobox aircraft engine with the others. However infobox aircraft begin may or may not end up being merged into Infobox aircraft engine. The template pages should be updated accordingly. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
 * &rarr; Infobox aircraft
 * For Infobox aircraft engine, There is an ongoing discussion about whether the aircraft engine Infobox should be merged with the Infobox aircraft or not. Except for the engine Infobox, other Infoboxes can be orphaned and there are no objection for that. Prarambh20 (talk) 22:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * This discussion is still ongoing, so I have moved it back to the "to merge" list with the others. Primefac (talk) 10:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The discussion has now ended (diff), with the consensus NOT TO MERGE Infobox aircraft engine with the others. However infobox aircraft begin may or may not end up being merged into Infobox aircraft engine. The template pages should be updated accordingly. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Link templates

 * Because Lx has the option to hide certain links and PageLinks itself doesn't, a direct merge is impossible. The next best thing would be to convert the transclusions to invocations of Module:PageLinks. Doesn't look too impossible at first glance. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 00:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Problem: Lx's 20,000 transclusions are kinda fake, because almost all of them are transclusions of transclusions. Even if we restrict it to the template namespace, most of are transclusions of transclusions of transclusions in the doc subpage. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 00:38, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The more I look at this, the more it appears technically infeasible. Lx has some really bizarre arguments like tag and label which can't be replicated by Module:PageLinks. When Lx was used to link to a normal page, namespace is usually Talk and label is usually talk, but when it's used to link to a talk page, either could be anything. Also, the recursive transclusion issue means the only way to get our pages would be an insource search, which means we'd also have to deal with pages like this.Replacing all uses of the format  with   could be a start. From there, I'm totally lost. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 16:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * What if we only replaced uses matching an insource search in the template namespace, and then substed everything else? Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 19:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The more I look at this, the more it appears technically infeasible. Lx has some really bizarre arguments like tag and label which can't be replicated by Module:PageLinks. When Lx was used to link to a normal page, namespace is usually Talk and label is usually talk, but when it's used to link to a talk page, either could be anything. Also, the recursive transclusion issue means the only way to get our pages would be an insource search, which means we'd also have to deal with pages like this.Replacing all uses of the format  with   could be a start. From there, I'm totally lost. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 16:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * What if we only replaced uses matching an insource search in the template namespace, and then substed everything else? Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 19:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Other

 * and
 * Note Pending Redesign RfC robertsky (talk) 18:51, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I've closed the RfC. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 15:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * At this point this is ready for large scale replacement. I said a while ago that I could do it but due to me being quite busy IRL this seems unlikely to get done in a timely manner. If you feel like doing a large scale replacement job feel free to take this one. --Trialpears (talk) 17:34, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Trialpears, what large-scale replacement? I (foolishly?) jumped into this rabbit hole, and have been in it for over a day now. This is a very complex merge; I've got the documentation diff to show fewer differences, but there's still more to be done. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi now that Wikisourcelang is being merged, how do I use the merge target template to point to sister language Wikisources? All the links keep incorrectly pointing to the English version and the documentation of Wikisource has not been updated about this. Folly Mox (talk) 20:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * , the merge has not yet been completed, so you should use the appropriate currently-existing template to do whatever it is you are planning until the merge is complete. The existing uses will be converted appropriately at that time. Primefac (talk) 09:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Oops, I forgot I had posted here. My assertion was incorrectly based on the first instance I had tested, which had been misusing parameters in such a way that it worked prior to the start of the merge process but not afterwards. The links to en.s/lang:page do properly redirect if the parameters are used correctly, but I didn't initially follow the links to check. It was quite an embarrassing hour or so of my contribution history. Folly Mox (talk) 13:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I see I am not supposed to use Wikisourcehas on "additional pages" so I have had to move to using Sister project because Wikisource does not have the required functionality. I shall look out for further developments because some very clever coding will be needed. Thincat (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
 * For over a year now we have been instructed not to use Wikisource author, Wikisourcelang and Wikisourcehas and this is a nuisance because avoiding their use is not at all trivial. Can we have a report on progress with the merge, please, or permission to again use these templates? Thincat (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * See Primefac's note above. Just keep using the existing templates. They will be converted for you during the merge process, whenever it happens (these merges sometimes take a while, as you can see above). When the conversion is done, the merged template will support the features that you need. That's how it's supposed to work, anyway. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. That's helpful. Is there a change that could be usefully made to the display text in being deleted? Or maybe the assumption is that no one reads beyond the first line anyway. Thincat (talk) 20:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I see I am not supposed to use Wikisourcehas on "additional pages" so I have had to move to using Sister project because Wikisource does not have the required functionality. I shall look out for further developments because some very clever coding will be needed. Thincat (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
 * For over a year now we have been instructed not to use Wikisource author, Wikisourcelang and Wikisourcehas and this is a nuisance because avoiding their use is not at all trivial. Can we have a report on progress with the merge, please, or permission to again use these templates? Thincat (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * See Primefac's note above. Just keep using the existing templates. They will be converted for you during the merge process, whenever it happens (these merges sometimes take a while, as you can see above). When the conversion is done, the merged template will support the features that you need. That's how it's supposed to work, anyway. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. That's helpful. Is there a change that could be usefully made to the display text in being deleted? Or maybe the assumption is that no one reads beyond the first line anyway. Thincat (talk) 20:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. That's helpful. Is there a change that could be usefully made to the display text in being deleted? Or maybe the assumption is that no one reads beyond the first line anyway. Thincat (talk) 20:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I've ported the missing parameters from Archive to Module:Automatic archive navigator/sandbox. I'm in favor of renaming the module and changing Archive to use it, while redirecting Automatic_archive_navigator to Archive. I'd really appreciate if a template-editor could give this a look. — m w  (talk) (contribs) 21:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Check out the discussion at Template talk:Automatic archive navigator about whether or not these parameters should be ported over. prev and next from archive nav will definitely need to be added though. --Trialpears (talk) 21:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware of that discussion, thanks. If it turns out that they shouldn't be ported, feel free to revert my edits. I'll look into the other params later.— m w  (talk) (contribs) 22:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Feel free to raise the issue on the template talk page. Primefac (talk) 19:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * While the result was "merge" it seems that this should be moved to "convert" as looking at Craig Kilborn, the ID used there is "The-Kilborn-File/107748632605752", while the new one is at . The number is different. Unless I'm missing something else there is nothing here to merge. --Gonnym (talk) 10:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware of that discussion, thanks. If it turns out that they shouldn't be ported, feel free to revert my edits. I'll look into the other params later.— m w  (talk) (contribs) 22:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Feel free to raise the issue on the template talk page. Primefac (talk) 19:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * While the result was "merge" it seems that this should be moved to "convert" as looking at Craig Kilborn, the ID used there is "The-Kilborn-File/107748632605752", while the new one is at . The number is different. Unless I'm missing something else there is nothing here to merge. --Gonnym (talk) 10:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * While the result was "merge" it seems that this should be moved to "convert" as looking at Craig Kilborn, the ID used there is "The-Kilborn-File/107748632605752", while the new one is at . The number is different. Unless I'm missing something else there is nothing here to merge. --Gonnym (talk) 10:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * While the result was "merge" it seems that this should be moved to "convert" as looking at Craig Kilborn, the ID used there is "The-Kilborn-File/107748632605752", while the new one is at . The number is different. Unless I'm missing something else there is nothing here to merge. --Gonnym (talk) 10:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

To convert
Templates for which the consensus is that they ought to be converted to some other format are put here until the conversion is completed.


 * 2023 October 25
 * - convert to R from related word or R to related topic as appropriate
 * Adding this from RfD as it's template related. --Gonnym (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

To substitute
Templates for which the consensus is that all instances should be substituted (e.g. the template should be merged with the article or is a wrapper for a preferred template) are put here until the substitutions are completed. After this is done, the template is deleted from template space.


 * None currently

To orphan
These templates are to be deleted, but may still be in use on some pages. Somebody (it doesn't need to be an administrator, anyone can do it) should fix and/or remove significant usages from pages so that the templates can be deleted. Note that simple references to them from Talk: pages should not be removed. Add on bottom and remove from top of list (oldest is on top).


 * None currently

Ready for deletion
Templates for which consensus to delete has been reached, and for which orphaning has been completed, can be listed here for an administrator to delete. Remove from this list when an item has been deleted.


 * None currently