Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 December 4



Template:Infobox unbiseptium

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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).  No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete per nomination Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:06, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Infobox unbiseptium

Delete. Unused, article was deleted months ago. As it is not maintained, information could be wrong or outdated. Could have been in this earlier set of deletions: TfD#Infobox elements 121, 124, 126. DePiep (talk) 21:31, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Double sharp (talk) 15:50, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and related discussion —PC-XT+ 02:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Chinese periodic tables

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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).  No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 06:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Periodic table (simplified Chinese)
 * Periodic table (simplified Chinese, legend)
 * Periodic table (traditional Chinese)
 * Periodic table (traditional Chinese, legend)

Delete. Unused, barely functional and unnecessary. Unused in that they have no transclusions - lots of links due to navigation templates but no actual uses. Barely functional as there are no links, so they're only useful to someone who already knows the Chinese characters, with formatting problems due to everything being tagged as Chinese not just the characters. And unnecessary as this is not the Chinese WP; anyone who wants to read a periodic table in Chinese (or any other language) can use the iw links on e.g. Template:Periodic table. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 18:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, importantly for being not en-encyclopedic. (However, I'll miss the nice Chinese one-character-per-element illustration). -DePiep (talk) 20:13, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * note. I retract the no transclusions, as they have one, in Chemical elements in East Asian languages, but they shouldn't be used like that: even one (of simplified and traditional Chinese) takes up too much space; having both simplified and traditional is far too much given how they are largely identical. They could both be replaced with File:Periodic table zh-hans.svg as a thumbnail, with perhaps links added to the full tables on zh-wp, jp-wp etc. for those more curious about how they look in those languages.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 21:13, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I've boldly gone ahead and replaced the transclusions with the image thumbnail and link to the Chinese WP template so I think no transclusions is correct now.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 00:35, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Template:Periodic table (simplified Chinese, legend) and Template:Periodic table (traditional Chinese, legend). These two templates can easily be included in their respective periodic tables. Justinrleung (talk) 23:06, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete like the Hindi ones —PC-XT+ 02:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Lil Kim sidebar

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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).  No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete per prior consensus. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 00:00, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Lil Kim sidebar

Navigates too few articles, which are easily navigated. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:33, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * 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). No further edits should be made to this section.