Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 January 9



Template:Uw-bics

 * 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; deleted by AnomieBOT ⚡  02:06, 17 January 2021 (UTC) This recently created user warning template is overbroad and, because it only gives examples of problematic conduct, does not specifically identify the particular conduct at issue and link to the relevant policy, as do the existing user warning templates. Bsherr (talk) 18:49, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Uw-bics
 * Delete per my comment on the talk page here. --IamNotU (talk) 18:59, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. BilCat (talk) 20:44, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment from the owner. I created this template because I have troubles with those who create multiple advertisement or spam pages and I was tired of using the Uw-create series as I felt that it was only appropriate for those who create vandalistic pages, test pages or pages with patent nonsense (gibberish or word salad). Some people create multiple drafts about the same subject without listening to the talk page notices saying 'Speedy deletion nomination of Article X' that appear several times. However, I would say rewrite it so it talks about those who create repeated non-notable or spammy pages. Train of Knowledge (Talk) 21:32, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Does Template:Db-spam-notice not serve that purpose? --Bsherr (talk) 05:14, 14 January 2021 (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:2021 US Capitol Storming

 * 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 for now. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 18:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC) This template really just functions as a list of notable groups/persons who were present at the storming, but in template form. The groups/persons are already discussed and mentioned in the article. Mgasparin (talk) 07:06, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 2021 US Capitol Storming


 * Very Weak Keep there's a bit of WP:SYNTH and WP:UNSOURCED as is, but I think it can be salvaged. There seem to be enough otherwise-notable pages to put the navbox on. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 07:13, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep leaning toward Keep. A template on the storming could be useful but the current template needs work. Participating groups and notable individual participants should be listed in the template with credible sources backing them. Especially since users have been purging participants/participating groups from the storming's main article (though that should, hopefully, end after the "smoke clears"). Mt.FijiBoiz (talk) 07:16, 9 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep for now per . As the main article continues to expand, there is an increasing likelihood of more articles being spun off from it and more content being added to existing articles of relevance. Therefore, a template is a good way of navigating through all of the relevant material. Love of Corey (talk) 09:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. The rationale given for deleting implies that only one article uses the template. There appear to be 17 articles that transclude it, so the rationale is invalid. Nurg (talk) 09:24, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. This creates WP:BLPCRIME issues insofar as it's connecting low-profile(ish) living people to criminal activity. It also creates WP:WEIGHT issues insofar as, if used properly, it will appear on each of those individuals' articles, strongly suggesting that their involvement in the riot is a central fact of their biography, which is not necessarily the case. There are further WP:WEIGHT issues internal to the navbox itself insofar as it suggests that the groups listed played the foremost role in the event, when in fact they're just the groups who happened to turn up with flags that journalists could interpret, and in all likelihood the vast majority of rioters were unaffiliated to any of them. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 11:51, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete -- most if not all of the current elements of this template are up for deletion, and I don't think there will be enough left to create a full template. Right now, having a main article which links to related articles ("International reaction," the articles of all wiki-notable participants, etc.) is sufficient. I'd rather delete this template and re-create it once there's enough to put in it, rather than leave it sitting mostly useless. RexSueciae (talk) 16:06, 9 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Starzoner (talk) 16:22, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep for nowJackFromReedsburg (talk &#124; contribs) 18:01, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment The template currently lists 11 "individual participants". Of those, 4 are presently up for deletion (Angeli, Barnett, Coffman, Johnson), and at present, only 3 are strongly leaning towards deletion. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:32, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per OP. I think some of the other links that are included feel a bit contrived/shoe-horned, meaning this is really just a collection names of perpetrators. — Czello 19:29, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Each person mentioned has their own Wikipedia article which mentions their role. Even if you deleted some of the names, the template still serves its purpose by providing a quick-link to the involved topics. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:27, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. This is just a random collection of topics. Most of the individual participants are up for deletion (and most of them will be deleted); the remaining list is just a collection of BLPs and other articles (like Parler) with a tenuous relationship to the topic. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 22:13, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per AP above Kingsif (talk) 22:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep for now Things are changing quickly. Autarch (talk) 00:38, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - If the template cannot be kept, I would suggest making it its own section in another relevant template, like what was done with the Boston Marathon bombing and Template:Boston Athletic Association. Love of Corey (talk) 01:08, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't think this is necessary regardless of things "moving quickly". We could be adding anything to it - QAnon, Neo-Nazis, Twitter, computers, American flags. Most of the participants are getting deleted anyway given the discussions taking place. I agree with User:AleatoryPonderings on this one. Also per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Missvain (talk) 02:54, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - We have one for the 9/11 attacks, and we should definitely have one for this event, which has much more readily available information, that will only continue to grow. - R9tgokunks   ⭕  04:01, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a useful template. We have a whole bunch of articles directly related to the attack and its repercussions (2021 storming of the United States Capitol, 2021 efforts to remove Donald Trump from office, International reactions to the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol, tomorrow we'll probably have Second impeachment of Donald Trump as well, and several others; the template will also include articles on any criminal investigations that are likely to be written in the near future). --Tataral (talk) 04:24, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. You can make a template out of anything, and the listings are just a lumping of anything connected to the events, while most of the articles listed have no direct correlation (Parler and Alt-Right).   Why isn't BLM and Antifa mentioned in the template then?  Might as well link Biden too, because his telepromter gave an opinion in the event.  You can make a template named water and link the word wet, and it will not have any significance.  Comparing this event to 9/11, as mentioned above, is a mindboggling stretch too.  —Notorious4life (talk) 05:29, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep The attack was only 3 days ago, and the topic will expand greatly as time progresses. If this is deleted, we'll just end up making a new template in the future. Jonmaxras (talk) 07:01, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per nominator. It's been used on BLPs which may not be a violation of our rules on WP:BLPCRIME per se, but it certainly is problematic. The only thing I can think of that is directly relevant to it is 2021 efforts to remove Donald Trump from office. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 19:14, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Many new articles have been created in the last few days. However, the BLPs should be removed from the template. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 17:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. per User:MJL and User:Notorious4life. Nadzik (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, although consider renaming. ABC News has reported the FBI believes more violent is planned for the days leading up to the Inauguration next week. (And I'll be happier than anyone here if I'm wrong about that.) -- llywrch (talk) 00:24, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful. And I suspect this topic will grow over time. For example, it's looking like Rep. Tim Ryan (Ohio politician) is going to be leading a 9/11 Commission style commission to investigate this event. That will generate at least 1 additional article to add to the series. I do have one concern though. We may not want to add this template to every article in the box. Or we may want to take some of the less related articles out of the template. – Novem Linguae (talk) 05:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep and perhaps rename. – SJ + 06:18, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * What do you propose the template be renamed too? Mt.FijiBoiz (talk) 07:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * At the least, uncapitalizing "storming". Then wait two weeks to see about the name. If there is an obviously related series of events involving the same groups or people, perhaps the same nav will be used for related events through the following days. – SJ +  03:23, 15 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. Useful. It is used at a lot of articles, so it is far from death or meet anyother reasons of deleting. Carsrac (talk) 07:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep: We do not know if there is more information that could still be uncovered, which may lead to more articles related to the topic to be created.  There are also many sections that have their own articles.  Aceing_Winter_Snows_Harsh_Cold (talk) 08:14, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. This seems a reasonable topic for a navbox, and I don't have WP:BLPCRIME concerns so long as the involvement is sourced at the individuals' pages. Whether to include the box on a given biographical page is a question for each individual page. Once the dust settles we can revisit. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 09:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: Sufficient articles that this is as useful as most other navboxes. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:06, 12 January 2021 (UTC).


 * Keep: I think the template is useful. Plus, once the dust has settled, and we are able to go back to the page itself to shorten it, the template will be extremely helpful in navigation to related articles. NDfan173 (talk) 23:46, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: Notable event, I use it for navigation --🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 17:19, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per nom. Many events are only loosely connected and doesn't seem to warrant its own navbox. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 21:50, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep for now -- Wendylove (talk) 01:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per nom. Just a list of topics, vaguely, or even distantly, related to the "storming". Nigej (talk) 15:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: I believe that the navbox is useful. Whether the navbox should be retained is a discussion I feel would be useful later - perhaps (though this is uncertain) the article list surrounding the events at the US Capitol could expand substantially over time, and that would further justify the navbox. · &#124; (talk - contributions) 16:10, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Small, well-defined group of articles, exactly appropriate for a NAVBOX. Jason Quinn (talk) 12:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nominator; and too much potential for abuse with addition of marginally relevant articles. Butlerblog (talk) 14:14, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep appropriate navbox for relevant articles. ɱ  (talk) 00:18, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's useful. WestCD (talk) 01:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - deletion rationale isn't persuasive or logical. The template is useful for navigating a complicated topic spanning numerous notable subjects. OrgoneBox (talk) 17:45, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - While we'll assume good faith, the nomination is flawed.
 * The template is more than just .
 * Even if it was, that would not be ground for deletion. It would be ground for renaming the template.
 * Banana Republic (talk) 18:19, 16 January 2021 (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:UnitedHealthcare riders

 * 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 <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 18:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC) Team is defunct, so the template is no longer required. Craig (talk)  03:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * UnitedHealthcare riders


 * Delete per nom. --TheImaCow (talk) 18:48, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, since it seems that this is intended to be the current riders. Nigej (talk) 15:31, 14 January 2021 (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:Aqua Blue Sport riders
<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(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 <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 18:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC) Team is defunct, so the template is no longer required. Craig (talk)  02:50, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Aqua Blue Sport riders


 * Delete per nom. --TheImaCow (talk) 18:49, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, since it seems that this is intended to be the current riders. Nigej (talk) 15:31, 14 January 2021 (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:Commanders-in-chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans
<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(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 <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 18:56, 16 January 2021 (UTC) Not necessary; only 2 of the ~70 entries have articles. I redirected the equivalent List of commanders-in-chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans to List of members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, but that list isn't defining enough to justify an infobox. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 02:08, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Commanders-in-chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans
 * Delete per nom, only 2 of the entries have articles, which is not enough to justify navbox. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:15, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Completely unreferenced too. Nigej (talk) 15:34, 14 January 2021 (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:User Roblox
<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(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 nominate it at WP:MFD. (non-admin closure)  Seventyfiveyears (talk) 18:27, 9 January 2021 (UTC) This userbox does not contain any useful information. I nominate this template for deletion per WP:NOTBLOG, as you cannot identify the user's Roblox profile.  Seventyfiveyears (talk) 01:35, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * User Roblox
 * , if you look at the instructions at the top of WP:TFD you will see a "What not to propose for discussion here" section which has "Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside." So, if you follow those instructions, this discussion should be moved there. Thanks! Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  17:43, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah I didn't see that. I'm closing and moving this discussion to WP:MFD.  Seventyfiveyears (talk) 18:27, 9 January 2021 (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).

Australian closed station deprecated templates
<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(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 <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 18:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC) 2 deprecated templates for Australian closed stations replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Australian closed station. Fleet Lists (talk) 01:27, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Australian closed station style
 * Victoria closed style
 * Delete: per nom. Techie3 (talk) 02:42, 9 January 2021 (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).