Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 February 20



Template:PD-NZSection27

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2017 March 5 Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:46, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * PD-NZSection27
 * 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:Rounders by region

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  12:10, 3 March 2017 (UTC) Only used in two articles, both of which are up for deletion. -- Tavix ( talk ) 21:46, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Rounders by region
 * delete, we can connect any remaining articles through the see also section. Frietjes (talk) 15:08, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: Both articles have been deleted. -- Tavix ( talk ) 01:03, 2 March 2017 (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).

Template:Research help

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 04:54, 4 March 2017 (UTC) Template that displays nothing when transcluded and whose use has been rejected by consensus in April 2016 P p p er y 18:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Research help
 * Delete, not useful for improving Wikipedia. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 02:55, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * delete, no longer useful. Frietjes (talk) 15:09, 21 February 2017 (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).

Template:Tariq Nasheed

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2017 March 5 Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:46, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Tariq Nasheed
 * 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:Noon Universe

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was merge Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:47, 5 March 2017 (UTC) Propose merging Template:Noon Universe with Template:Arkady and Boris Strugatsky.
 * Noon Universe
 * Arkady and Boris Strugatsky

Seems we would be best served if these were merged, as a large chunk of their works are conspicuously absent from Arkady and Boris Strugatsky. Rob Sinden (talk) 16:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea. Noon Universe was the first one created, historically, and the other template was created later to list related articles that were not already listed on the former. In retrospect, it would have been better to do it the other way around and to have just one, author-specific navbox in the first place. --Koveras ☭ 16:46, 20 February 2017 (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).

Template:Angry Birds

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was merge Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:47, 5 March 2017 (UTC) Propose merging Template:Angry Birds with Template:Rovio Games.
 * Angry Birds
 * Rovio Games

There's an awful lot of crossover here - I think the Angry Birds template only has one unique link. I'm sure they can be merged. Rob Sinden (talk) 15:00, 20 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Support - There is no benefit to having them separate, they are both small enough that a merged template is perfectly acceptable. -  Galatz Talk  04:17, 21 February 2017 (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).

Template:Infobox map
<div class="boilerplate tfd vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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).

The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2017 March 6 Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 00:01, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Infobox map
 * Location map
 * 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:Cue sports bios
<div class="boilerplate tfd vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Creator/undeletion requester has decided that they apparently have no interest in participating in the TFD, and there is no other opposition to deletion. Primefac (talk) 04:58, 4 March 2017 (UTC) Never possible to be completed. We don't have templates for every basketball or football players, nor famous ones. 2001:DA8:201:3512:F997:D2AD:311F:A546 (talk) 16:34, 13 January 2017 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Per user request, re-opening discussion to allow creator (who was not informed of the nomination) an opportunity to contest.
 * Cue sports bios
 * delete, better to use a category. Frietjes (talk) 16:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 01:07, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unless an incredibly good rationale comes along, these sorts of things are always handled via category. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 01:40, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clearly unsuitable for a navbox. Best for category navigation.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 16:46, 20 February 2017 (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).