Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

(Redirected from Wikipedia:TFDHOWTO)
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. For a list of templates used for discussion, see Wikipedia:List of discussion templates.
Find this page confusing? Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page; a volunteer will visit you there shortly!
XFD backlog
V Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
CfD 0 0 16 103 119
TfD 0 0 1 36 37
MfD 0 0 0 5 5
FfD 0 0 3 10 13
RfD 0 0 0 43 43
AfD 0 0 0 4 4
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

On this page, the deletion or merging of templates and modules, with a few exceptions, is discussed.

How to use this page

edit

What not to propose for discussion here

edit
Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

Stub templates
Stub templates and categories should be listed at Categories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories, unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
Userboxes
Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
Speedy deletion candidates
If the template clearly satisfies a criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{Db-author}}. See also WP:T5.
Policy or guideline templates
Templates that are associated with particular Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as the speedy deletion templates, cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant policy or guideline.
Template redirects
List all redirects at Redirects for discussion.
Moving and renaming a template
Use Requested moves.

Reasons to delete a template

edit
Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance.
  2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
  3. The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used.
  4. The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and it can't be fixed through normal editing.

Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, WikiProject Templates may be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.

Listing a template

edit
Shortcuts

To list a template for deletion or merging, follow the three-step process below. Do not include the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps.

If you have never nominated a template for deletion or used Twinkle before, you might want to do it manually to avoid making mistakes. For more experienced editors, using Twinkle is recommended, as it automates some of these steps. (After navigating to the template you want to nominate, click its dropdown menu in the top right of the page: TW , and then select "XFD".)

Step Instructions
Step 1

Tag the template

Paste one of the following notices to the top of the template page:

Note:

  • If the template is protected, request that the TfD notice be added on the template's talk page using the {{editprotected}} template, to catch the attention of administrators or template editors.
  • If the template is designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template. Example: <noinclude>{{subst:Tfd}}</noinclude>
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion/merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
  • Before saving your edit, preview the page to ensure the TfD notice is displayed properly.
Multiple templates
If you are nominating multiple templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with {{subst:Tfd|heading=discussion title}} or {{subst:Tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}} instead of the versions given above, replacing discussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing the PAGENAME code).
Related categories
If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, paste {{Catfd|template name}} to the top of any categories that could be deleted as a result of the TfD, replacing template name with the name of the nominated template. (If you instead nominated multiple templates, use the meaningful title you chose earlier: {{Catfd|header=title of nomination}}.)
TemplateStyles pages
If you are nominating TemplateStyles pages, these templates won't work. Instead, paste this CSS comment to the top of the page:
/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025_December_24#Template:template_name.css */
Step 2

List the template

Edit today's TfD log and paste the following text to the top of the list:
  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add {{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without square brackets|result of previous TfD}} in the |text= field immediately before your rationale (or alternatively at the very end, after the last }}).

Use an edit summary such as Adding deletion/merger nomination of [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates
If you are nominating multiple templates, paste the following code instead. You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters |). Use the same meaningful title that you chose in Step 1.
  • Multiple templates for deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|title=meaningful title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • Multiple templates for merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}
    • If there is a template you want the other templates to be merged into, you can optionally specify it using |with=.
Related categories
If this template deletion proposal involves a category populated solely by templates, paste this code in the |text= field of the {{Tfd2}} template, before your rationale: {{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
Step 3

Notify users

Notify the creator of the template, the main contributors, and (if you're proposing a merger) the creator of the other template. (To find them, look in the page history or talk page of the template.) To do this, paste one of the following in their user talk pages:
  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd notice|template name}} ~~~~
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm notice|template name|other template's name}} ~~~~
  • Multiple templates: There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination. In these cases, write a personal message.

If you see any WikiProjects banners (they look like this) at the top of the template's talk page, you can let them know about the discussion. Most WikiProjects are subscribed to Article alerts, which means they are automatically notified. If you think they have not been notified, you can paste the same message in the projects' talk pages, or use Deletion sorting lists. Note that Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects.

Consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination notice is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors

edit

While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD, nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give the criterion that it meets.

  • Notifying related WikiProjects: WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{subst:Tfd notice}} for this. Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's Article Alerts automatically, if they are subscribed to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.
  • Notifying main contributors: While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the creator and any main contributors of the template and its talk page that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the page history or talk page.

At this point, no further action is necessary on your part. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone other than you will either close the discussion or, if needed, "relist" it for another seven days of discussion. If the nomination is successful, it will be moved to the Holding Cell until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.

Discussion

edit

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the deletion policy and explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommend subst, subst and delete, or similar. This means they think the template text should be "hard-coded" into the articles that are currently using it. Depending on the content, the template itself may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.

Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussion

edit

Administrators should read the closing instructions before closing a nomination. Note that WP:XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

edit

December 24

edit

Module:Adjacent stations/Skalica buses

edit

Unused bus module. Gonnym (talk) 11:05, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Protection/Template:Edit fully-protected/doc

edit

Associated pages are redirects to Template:Edit interface-protected/doc, and the editnotices are identical to Template:Editnotices/Protection/Template:Edit semi-protected/doc. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:48, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:WikiProject Open proxies/Requests

edit

Propose merging Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:WikiProject Open proxies/Requests with Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Open proxies noticeboard/Requests.
The former is associated with a redirect to the page associated with the latter, but the content is differently formatted. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:45, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Article creation

edit

Associated page is a redirect to Help:Your first article, and the editnotice is similar to Template:Editnotices/Page/Help:Your first article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:43, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Mirmo! characters

edit

Associated page was redirected to Mirmo! on December 15 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Mirmo! characters. Should this editnotice be applied to that page? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:35, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/List of common misconceptions

edit

Blanked in May 2025 because the associated page was converted to a list of lists. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:17, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:HTML 5

edit

Associated page is a redirect to Wikipedia talk:HTML5, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:HTML5. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:08, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:Alphabetical order (article names)

edit

Associated page is a redirect to Wikipedia talk:MediaWiki order of page names, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:MediaWiki order of page names. At this point I'd ask if a new CSD is needed to handle editnotices like the ones I've nominated here. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:08, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:Classification

edit

Associated page is a redirect to Wikipedia talk:Category classification templates, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia talk:Category classification templates. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:06, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/I Belong to You (Nikki Sudden song)

edit

Associated page was redirected to Nikki Sudden in April 2025, and the target article does not have an English variant tag. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 10:00, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Help talk:Convert

edit

Associated page was converted to a cross-namespace redirect to Template talk:Convert in 2022. Therefore, this notice no longer applies. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:56, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/ITunes Originals – R.E.M.

edit

Associated page is a redirect to R.E.M. discography, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/R.E.M. discography. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:54, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/The Magic Faraway Tree (novel)

edit

Associated page is a redirect to The Faraway Tree, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/The Faraway Tree. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:51, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

edit

Associated article was mreged and redirected to Shinto in July 2025, but the content was later deleted. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:50, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Tyler James Robinson

edit

Associated page is a redirect to Assassination of Charlie Kirk, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/Assassination of Charlie Kirk. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:48, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/The Folk of the Faraway Tree

edit

Associated page is a redirect to The Faraway Tree, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/The Faraway Tree. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:47, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/The Enchanted Wood (novel)

edit

Associated page is a redirect to The Faraway Tree, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/The Faraway Tree. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:46, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Persian-language poets

edit

Associated page is a redirect to List of Persian-language poets and authors, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Persian-language poets and authors. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:44, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Quebec comedians

edit

Associated page is a redirect to List of comedians from Quebec, and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/List of comedians from Quebec. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:36, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Nintendo Switch games (A)

edit

Associated page is a redirect to List of Nintendo Switch games (A–Am), and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Nintendo Switch games (A–Am). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:33, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Nintendo Switch games (0–A)

edit

Associated page is a redirect to List of Nintendo Switch games (0–9), and the editnotice is identical to Template:Editnotices/Page/List of Nintendo Switch games (0–9). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:32, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Nigger

edit

Since Nigger is extended-confirmed protected, racist joke edits are highly unlikely to happen in the future. I don't have a strong opinion on the identical Template:Editnotices/Page/Talk:Nigger, where Talk:Nigger is semi-protected. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:16, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Attached KML/Riverside Drive, Perth

edit

Unused. Removed by User:Elrondil with this edit. Gonnym (talk) 09:05, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Attached KML/Queen Victoria Street, Fremantle

edit

Unused. Removed by User:Elrondil with this edit. Gonnym (talk) 09:05, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:USPopulousCities

edit

This is not a navbox but is used as such at the bottom of the article. Logoshimpo (talk) 03:42, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]


December 23

edit

Template:Events leading to the Iraq War

edit

Redundant to the prelude section in Template:Iraq War. And per WP:Leadsidebar - not everything needs a sidebar. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:46, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Iconfarw

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 Maile66 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:03, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Recently created icon template with no clear purpose. Sugar Tax (talk) 17:06, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:FAstarbarn

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 as G7 by MPGuy2824 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 07:04, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to {{Novice Editor}}, at a name that doesn't make sense. No transclusions or documentation. This editor has created a bunch of stuff in Template space that does not appear to be useful or related to our project of creating an encyclopedia. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:01, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I'm fine with that. r f q i i talk! 17:34, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per WP:G7 per the creator's comment above. Sugar Tax (talk) 18:22, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Swastika not Hakenkreuz editnotice

edit

Editnotice template that is only used for one page, Template:Editnotices/Page/Talk:Nazi symbolism. Suggest subst and delete. Sugar Tax (talk) 16:23, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete after merging. I believe I may have created the editnotice in question, but I have no objection to the suggested substitution.
Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:15, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hurricane Ivan series

edit

Two of the remaining four articles were merged, this isn’t needed anymore. ~2025-42442-40 (talk) 16:04, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Our Generation

edit

No documentation, categories, or incoming links from discussion pages. Created in 2023. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:49, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Michael D. Higgins sidebar

edit

Only links to two articles of direct relevance, all other are already linked in the main article. Also fails navigation. Not every world leader or former politician needs a sidebar. Spleodrach (talk) 11:48, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This material is basically on the article covered by his infobox. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 16:06, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Yellow Line (Ahmedabad Metro)

edit

Unused route template which was replaced with an image. Gonnym (talk) 11:39, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Samuel Beckett class OPV

edit

Unused templates which have been replaced with {{Irish Naval Service}}. Gonnym (talk) 11:26, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ship classes generally have their own templates to allow quick navigation. The three class templates have been restored to the relevant pages. Hammersfan (talk) 16:17, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I removed these templates from the ship pages because they duplicated content already in {{Irish Naval Service}}. I see that some have been re-added.
A few months ago, I removed another template {{IrishNavyFleet}} which duplicated {{Irish Naval Service}}. And then {{Post1945IrishShips}} was created which duplicated content again. I see no need for a bloated template which duplicates the content already provided in a more compact and readable template.
Regarding the argument that others aid navigation, these templates do not appear on mobile and therefore of no aid to navigation to mobile users.
The templates are set to auto-collapse, so when there are two or more of them, they are all collapsed and mostly hidden. How does a almost invisible template help navigation? Yes, you can set one, like {{Irish Naval Service}}, to be auto-expanded, but doesn't that also remove the need for the others?
Regarding the ship classes templates, the ships are already listed in {{Irish Naval Service}}, so why need to list them again in another template? Each of the ship pages has an info box with a link to the ship's class where you can see the other ships in that class. Cluttering a page with duplicated content does not add value or aid navigation.
I can understand the ship classes templates in the scenario for a very large class of ships or in a large navy where a navy template would be unwieldy. For example, a template with all the Ticonderoga cruisers, like in USS Mobile Bay is appropriate as there are many ships in that class. US naval ships pages don't use the {{US Navy}} template because it does not include any ships, and it is already very big. Adding hundreds of ships to {{US Navy}} would make it massive and take over the ship's page. But the Irish navy is small with only eight active and fifteen inactive ships, so why the need for another template duplicating the content already adequately provided in {{Irish Naval Service}}?
I need much better arguments to keep these templates than they simply help navigation. Cluttering a page with duplicated content is not an improvement to navigation, readability or anything. Given the time of year, I'll give some time for some good arguments, and if none are provided, the ship pages will be updated to remove the templates.
P.S. By the way, I have doubts that Emer, Roisin and Samuel Beckett are valid ship class names. They are usually referred to as the P20, P50 and P60 class in government debates. It similar to the way the Type 45 destroyer is used even though the first ship is named Darling.
Other class names used are Helicopter Patrol Vessel (HPV), Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV), Coastal Patrol Vessel (CPV), Large Patrol Vessel (LPV) and Inshore Patrol Vessels (IPV).[1][2]The pages on Emer, Aoife and Aisling are interesting in what they have for the ships' class.[3] George Bernard Shaw is also interesting in the ships class.[4]
P.S.S. I guess someone will argue the above are primary references and only secondary references will do. If that is true, and if the first ship in a class is the name of the class why is the Trump class battleship so named when the first ship is named USS Defiant? Finestat (talk) 23:37, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2026 Indian Premier League Points table

edit

TOOSOON for the points table; no fixture-related detail have been revealed except for the date. Vestrian24Bio 09:46, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uddhav Thackeray series

edit

Only three links of relevance. Rest are links to article sections and just text or unrelated or make no mention of subject. Per WP:Leadsidebar not everyone nor everything needs a sidebar. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:20, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lifespan prime minister of India

edit

Two articles it is used on. Subst and delete. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:18, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:S. Jaishankar series

edit

Contains mostly links to article sections. Only three articles are relevant to subject. The two books written and article on international trips made. Per WP:Leadsidebar - not everyone nor every subject needs a sidebar template. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:18, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BAB-E

edit

Duplicated with {{Pictogram weg Europa E-weg}}, suggested deleted and moved from Pictogram weg Europa E-weg. The source template name is not following WP:ENGLISH DiaoBaoHuaJian (talk) 03:08, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]


December 22

edit

Template:Notnow

edit

I don't think this template is helpful; WP:NOTNOW cases need gentle encouragement in one's own words. Boilerplate is not going to work—if it did, they would've listed to the extensive boilerplate at WP:RFA/N telling them to think twice, and then twice more. Delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:28, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National symbols of Wales

edit

Redundant to {{Wales topics}}. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:30, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Traditional and public holidays in Scotland

edit

Propose merging Template:Traditional and public holidays in Scotland with Template:Scotland topics.
No need for a separate navbox. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:45, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

pls stop overloading country templates making them inaccessible. Luckily only 20% of people see these. Moxy🍁 23:24, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fue (flute)

edit

This template is used inside Template:Traditional Japanese musical instruments and on some pages both appear. This should just be subst into the larger template and deleted. Gonnym (talk) 18:17, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Use Maltese English

edit

This template is not usable, for the same reasons as some of the other "Use X English" templates that have recently been deleted. The sole purpose of these templates is to provide guidance to editors about the spellling, vocabulary, and grammar in writing articles, but per the article at Maltese English, "There is no grammar book, and while several bilingual MaltE-BrE dictionaries exist, there is no defining dictionary". A lack of standards means that guidance is impossible to provide. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:29, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:SuccessScoreandRanking

edit

Unused sports-related module. Gonnym (talk) 12:52, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Goalscorers/data/2027 FIFA Women's World Cup qualification (UEFA)

edit

Unused data module. Gonnym (talk) 12:49, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This data module will be used in just a couple months for UEFA qualification. It is easier and better for the project in the long run to keep it than to require it to be rebuilt or refunded. This is a purely bureaucratic nomination with no effort to determine whether it will be used in the near-term. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 16:14, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on my own !vote: Per WP:TFD#REASONS #3, templates and modules should be deleted if [t]he template is not used ... and has no likelihood of being used. (emphasis in original) Since this dataset is definitely going to be used, I would suggest that this discussion be closed as a speedy keep, or that Gonnym withdraws the nomination. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 22:39, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - certainly going to be used. Technically could argue WP:TOOSOON, but no harm in keeping it. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:45, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:DartsRankings/data/WSDT Players

edit

Unused data module. Gonnym (talk) 12:49, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - WP:T5 - Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:04, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lazard

edit

Outdated and not useful Update6 (talk) 11:03, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hooshmand Dehghan

edit

Navbox with only 2 core links, the person and a book. That isn't enough for a navigation template. Gonnym (talk) 08:46, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hangon click preload

edit

This preload is unused, as {{hangon}} has been deprecated for over a decade. jlwoodwa (talk) 07:43, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 08:46, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Politics of California

edit

Barely used and has WAY too many links. Merge the important ones {{California}}. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:58, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Eat JUST, Inc.

edit

Contains the founders names and one product only, not useful Update6 (talk) 06:39, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:HanesBrands

edit

Too small, outdated information, several non-link items Update6 (talk) 06:29, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RfCheck

edit

A template which would allow people to request WP:CHECKUSER via an WP:RFA-like process. There is an established protocol to become a CU, and it does not involve a public election. Delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:33, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 08:47, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as obviated by the current process. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 16:26, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RfC3subst

edit

Unused template for the {{historical}} WP:RFC/U process; safe to delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:31, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 08:47, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as obviated. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 16:27, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Use Trinidad and Tobago English

edit

Trinidad and Tobago English spelling is described in this source as being based on British English spelling with some Americanisms. Unlike other dialects, there is no officially sanctioned spelling system for Trinidad and Tobago English nor any true form of standardisation suitable for use on Wikipedia. CROIXtalk 01:59, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This should be a maintenance template providing guidance to editors. All this does is create confusion—does an editor have to study Trinidad and Tobago English before contributing? Johnuniq (talk) 04:17, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. Dgp4004 (talk) 11:16, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 06:41, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, what? I have no shares in language templates, so I won't vote, but I would like to point out that votes should be based on facts, not gut feelings. The Dictionary of the English/Creole of Trinidad & Tobago has 1.072 pages with 12.000 keywords. "Some Americanisms" is a joke considering the plethora of loanwords based on the French (and to a degree) Spanish colonial history and the contemporary influence of East Indian dialects. (Among) The first entries of the dictionary: aach, aadhaa, aadhi, aage, aam. Sorry, I almost choked on that "some Americanisms" thing. Kind regards, Grueslayer 09:54, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It's because Wikipedia is only written in 'standard' (i.e. formal) English, whereas many of those words are Creole. The English language Wikipedia cannot be written in Creole terminology or else most readers would not understand it. Dgp4004 (talk) 10:13, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Interesting. In the German language Wikipedia, articles on Austrian topics use a template indicating that (de:Vorlage:österreichbezogen, would be "Template:Use Austrian German" in English), and in those articles Austrian German is used instead of German German, e.g. Januar (january) is written as Jänner. Wait, is it not the same here with British and American English? Kind regards, Grueslayer 12:20, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If someone has an interest in a topic they are welcome to edit an article they know something about and use appropriate words such as "elevator" or "lift", and use appropriate spelling such as "color" or "colour". Those differences acknowledge that the vast majority of editors follow US or UK spelling, maybe with some quirks. It may be that Trinidad and Tobago English has a different word for elevator/lift. Unless discussing language or for some other good reason, an article here would have to use a recognizable word such as elevator or lift. Using some other word would just create confusion. Johnuniq (talk) 00:47, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Schools in Jamaica

edit

Subject of template is far too broad. How are all 4,000 schools in the country supposed to fit into one template assuming this is ever of use? CROIXtalk 01:56, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National Heritage Sites in Jamaica

edit

Consists almost entirely of redlinks not useful for navigation. Even if the majority of these redlinks are ever created, the template is so large that if it were to be of navigational use, it would likely have to be split up for each parish.CROIXtalk 01:54, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Chessboard

edit

Propose merging Module:Chessboard with Module:Chessboard mxn.
module:chessboard produces essentially the same board as module:chessboard mxn, except it's way more accessible in the latter module. sapphaline (talk) 14:46, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment, I seem to remember there was some problem with the "post-include size" when using module:chessboard mxn. I am just re-reading this thread with DixonD and קיפודנחש now. Frietjes (talk) 16:36, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, the linked discussion is from 12+ years ago, and I draw a blank.
as of now I do not have strong opinion.
technically, I doubt there is any meaningful difference in speed of rendering (I think one of them contains more images, but "speed" only becomes an issue when you have large number of boards in one page, in which case many of the images are identical, so only have to be pulled from server once - actual rendering speed may differ between different browsers. if it's a concern, up to date measurements should be taken).
one of them may be more "expensive" in total html size - I think that I expressed some concerns about it in the 12+ YO discussion, if it's a real concern (I.e., if there are pages which use these modules and getting close to size limits), some up to date "measurements" may help decide.
peace. קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 18:37, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]


December 21

edit

Template:Numbered verses

edit

Superfluous template, only used by the creator in twothree articlesThe Banner talk 18:02, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I'm afraid I wouldn't understand why the template is superfluous without further explanation. I definitely prefer using this template (right) over not (left): Special:Diff/1328750774. In addition, using the br tag instead is bad for WP:Accessibility, as it only changes the presentation without the semantics (see [1]) which could be much more easily added to the template than to every bare article. Edit: I didn't realize enwiki enabled the poem extension, which is a better way to do this that Banner did use later. And even if none of the above is true, I do not find the numbers next to the verses this template adds objectionable enough to remove, as the deletion of this template would certainly cause. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:17, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW: With my curiosity now piqued, I had browsed two modern academic publications of Catullus' works as diverse as possible:
  1. Catullus, Gaius Valerius (2024). Catullus: Selected Poems. Translated by Mitchell, Stephen. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-27529-2.
  2. Harrison, Stephen (March 2025). "Englishing Catullus in the Twenty-First Century". Translation and Literature. 34 (1). Edinburgh University Press: 110–120. doi:10.3366/tal.2025.0618.
In both cases, there are no line numbers on the right. The second publication uses the line numbers on the left once. In both cases (and especially the second one) I personally would really appreciate the line numbers on the right, as in this template, as references to lines in the commentaries are abound. Викидим (talk) 22:20, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Викидим: I am glad you appreciate this template! If you want you can make your vote more explicit by writing a new non-indented comment below that begins with * '''Keep.''', like others did. If consensus goes in the opposite direction, this template will be deleted. --Grufo (talk) 22:36, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Quantitative metre

edit

Superfluous template, only used by the creator in twothree articles. The Banner talk 17:54, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The alternative would be asking editors to type  ⏒ ‒ ⏑ ‒ | ⏒ ‒ ⏑ ‒ | ⏒ ‒ ⏑ ‒  by hand, and we have no reason to do so. --Grufo (talk) 18:09, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait/Procedural close: I feel like this TfD needs to be preconditioned on a content discussion on whether Latin articles need to specify the quantitative meter. This template seems useful for specifying the quantitative meter, and useless otherwise. I do not have the relevant knowledge nor the consensus to decide which case applies. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:21, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Aaron Liu: If you go to some related pages (e.g. Greek and Latin metre, or also poems from various ancient writers), you will see these schemes all around, although often badly written (some people even use the letter “u” to indicate a short vowel “⏑” because the latter is hard to type) and without consistency. We can of course discuss how it should work, but a template that uniforms everything is arguably needed. --Grufo (talk) 18:28, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I have no position on the template itself and (especially) its use, but would like to ask a question: is there any other way to do scansion in English Wikipedia without knowing the Unicode hexadecimal values or copypasting symbols from other pages? --Викидим (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Викидим. No, as far as I know. --Grufo (talk) 21:26, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Then I would cautiously argue that we can use at least some template to enter the meter using a conventional keyboard layout. For the avoidance of doubt, I did (successfully) try writing down scansion symbols a couple of months ago and appreciated the purely typographic difficulties. So the subject of a potential discussion is a bit wider than suggested by Aaron Liu: do we need a purely typographic help for scansion, similar to, say, {{math}}? To the latter question, my answer is (again, cautious) "yes". Викидим (talk) 21:45, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I "did" Latin verse at school I learned that the arrangement of long and short syllables is crucial, in the same way as for stress (and rhyme) in English verse. But in Latin generally, apart from verse, not so, except as hints for pronunciation. Latin scholars will not need to reminded of the lengths and people with no Latin probably won't care. So I think this template is fairly useful and would best be encouraged. Thincat (talk) 10:32, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2024–25 Scottish Women's Premier League 2 table

edit

Unused after being subst here. Gonnym (talk) 16:56, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Bar box/doc

edit

Unused /doc template. Gonnym (talk) 14:14, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Module:Bar/doc per the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion#RFC:_Updating_T5_to_account_for_parent_templates_that_have_been_merged_at_TFD. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:32, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure where you see consensus. "No consensus for a change" ≠ "consensus for current thing". I see a 3vs4, so hardly a consensus. Gonnym (talk) 15:40, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See also Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_November_30#Module:Bar_box/sandbox. Gonnym (talk) 16:53, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Reduce trivia/doc

edit

Unused /doc template. Apparently T5 is meaningless. Gonnym (talk) 13:49, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Template:Trivia/doc per the consensus at Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion#RFC:_Updating_T5_to_account_for_parent_templates_that_have_been_merged_at_TFD --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:36, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Opencast release history

edit

Unused graph template. Gonnym (talk) 13:43, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So the way it worked out is 1) unmaintainable extension with XSS in it was removed 2) no viable migration path for graphs using data from wiki data was offered 3) inclusion from article removed because it's broken 4) template holding vega-lite-v2 diagram description gets deleted
Just out of curiosity: Is there a way to reliably get data from wiki data into a tab page, appearing as a hard database requirement? This particular page can be probably deleted as Opencast has switched to a time-based release cycle without much deviation from the timeline so the graph only provides limited value to readers at this point. -- Rillke (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Rillke not sure what you mean by a "hard database requirement", but you can use a Lua transform to populate a chart from Wikidata. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:39, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I didn't know this. Is there an example prompt for an LLM that reliably works transforming old Graph to new Lua+Chart syntax? -- Rillke (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note that I took a copy in case someone wants me to reproduce the graph in mw:Extension:Chart. -- Rillke (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Occupation by nationality category header

edit

Unused category template. At User talk:Smasongarrison#Template:Occupation by nationality category header the creator said it is ok to delete. Gonnym (talk) 13:42, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Element cell/ptg-blind/zh

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 as T5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:04, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused sub template. Gonnym (talk) 13:38, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Ethnic groups in Burundi

edit

Only 3 links. Merge and replace with {{Burundi topics}} Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:07, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stl neighborhoods

edit

Propose merging Template:Stl neighborhoods with Template:St. Louis.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:37, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think you meant merging into {{St. Louis}}, not {{St}}. You might want to fix that in case some automatic cleanup script does the work. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 01:12, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:09, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:26, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Duluth neighborhoods

edit

Propose merging Template:Duluth neighborhoods with Template:City of Duluth, Minnesota.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:34, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:26, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neighborhoods of Fort Wayne

edit

Propose merging Template:Neighborhoods of Fort Wayne with Template:Fort Wayne, Indiana.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:32, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:26, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neighborhoods of Denver

edit

Propose merging Template:Neighborhoods of Denver with Template:Denver.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:25, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:24, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Columbus, Georgia neighborhoods

edit

Propose merging Template:Columbus, Georgia neighborhoods with Template:Columbus, Georgia.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:25, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:24, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Saint Paul neighborhoods

edit

Propose merging Template:Saint Paul neighborhoods with Template:Saint Paul.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:31, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:24, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Phoenix neighborhoods

edit

Propose merging Template:Phoenix neighborhoods with Template:Phoenix, Arizona.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:27, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:24, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]


December 20

edit

Template:Neighborhoods in Omaha

edit

Propose merging Template:Neighborhoods in Omaha with Template:Omaha.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:09, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:51, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neighborhoods in Chicago

edit

Propose merging Template:Neighborhoods in Chicago with Template:Chicago.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:08, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Chicago might be large enough that this could be separate? WhisperToMe (talk) 01:18, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:51, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This makes the main navbox for Chicago (a major subject with a great many sub-topics) overly crowded (particularly given how many neighborhoods it has). These having their own navbox is the best option. SecretName101 (talk) 23:35, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Canon RF-lenses

edit

Unused table. It's also not useable in its current form as we don't support this kind of wikidata usage in articles. Gonnym (talk) 10:13, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The idea ist to use it at the lema Canon RF lens mount instead of the Table Canon RF-mount lenses. Advatage: if a new Lens is added to WD, it is automaticalley put to the leama. Similar Template is used in german Wikipedia for the lema RF-Bajonett. I have just fixed recently last bugs. So I vote for keeping it. BR GodeNehler (talk) 10:25, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 22:19, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:United States presidential transitions series

edit

Redundant to Template:United States presidential transitions which does the same thing. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:17, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep Not redundant. More accessible (accessible without needing scroll to the very bottom of an article). This is supplementary, not redundant to. Makes related topics more navigable, which is the interest of the project SecretName101 (talk) 06:32, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Peruvian political crisis short

edit

Created by a sockpuppet and subject is better covered by a navbox. We don't need a sidebar for everything per WP:Leadsidebar. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:43, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Infoboxes are more appealing to people and always more visually clearer the boring navboxes, (plus, It's one of my favourite template D:) GuesanLoyalist (talk) 06:17, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:GuesanLoyalist literally the definition of WP:ILIKEIT Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:36, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The personal remark are meant to be a comment on the situlation. I also mentioned that Infoboxes in general are:
  1. more visible (due to usually being at the top of the page)
  2. reader-friendly (some Infoboxes can have good design which appeals more and be more eye catching)

then navboxes which has less effort in design put in and placed at the bottom of the page, which can make some readers not even know the concept of a navbox.
GuesanLoyalist (talk) 02:49, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Design is up for debate. Its about avoiding redundancy. Two templates for one thing is not good. Your keep reason does not fit any reason per policy of basic issues that sidebars like this present. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:30, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see then, uhh...
Why does the navbox take higher priority over the sidebar? shouldn't the information of said navbar be moved to the sidebar for the reasons that I stated?
GuesanLoyalist (talk) 11:11, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redundancy. We don't more templates when is sufficient. Now we have a precedent. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:25, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So, the navbox takes higher priority over the sidebar due to having more information?
Well, like the name of Peruvian political crisis short suggest, I think that it supposed to summarize the information of Peruvian political crisis in order to not make the information less confusing and more understandable for the reader to read.
Still, there should still be benefits that Peruvian political crisis short could still offer that Peruvian political crisis couldn't, not everything is needed to be deleted automatically just because it's immediately useless in your view (in my personal opinion at least.)
GuesanLoyalist (talk) 22:42, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Its not my view. Two templates doing the same thing is not beneficial. Only one can suffice. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:23, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 22:04, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think sideboxes are supplmentary to bottom-located navboxes
provide the same utility, but at different locations in the article from eachother. There is often no harm in that. If anything, it is a positive, as it makes Wikipedia more easily navigable SecretName101 (talk) 06:35, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We have Template:Peruvian political crisis. There is often no harm in that extra maintenance - adding links, removing links, bypassing redirects, monitoring vandalism. Additionally, they take up valuable screen real-estate at the top of the screen, when they are really a "see also" that should be thrown at the bottom. Gonnym (talk) 15:45, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Field hockey at the 2010 Asian Games

edit

Only two links. Fails navigation. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:54, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 21:31, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dingdong Dantes

edit

Recently created but still fails navigational requirements. Only four articles of relevance to the subject. Same as navbox below. If the other text in navbox is to be created, we can userfy until ready for mainspace use. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:36, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning keep. 4 core links and 1 spouse link. Seems enough for a navigation template. Gonnym (talk) 08:57, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete even 4 days after nomination, still unused. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:37, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 21:10, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:STV election graph

edit

Another template using the disabled graph extension. If it can be converted to the new Chart extension then convert. If it can't, then delete template. Gonnym (talk) 16:03, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Awaiting comment from the two keeps above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 17:54, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2025 MPBL finals Game 1 result

edit

These matches have been played, and the current precedent is to use section transclusion to keep the text in the article space. Primefac (talk) 17:43, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Marvel characters

edit

The scope of this template is far too wide to implement it fully, it isn't included in most of the pages it features, and doesn't just include characters (objects, locations etc.). It also has subjective categorisation such as heroes, villains and supporting, when the nature of Marvel Comics allows for characters to fit into multiple categories. Emcgonigle (talk) 17:21, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I actually believe that having dozens of navigation templates for Marvel characters based on a character IP is worse. Look at Daredevil (Marvel Comics character) for example, 12 navboxes which could have been replaced with one. Gonnym (talk) 12:52, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If there really are too many characters, then maybe no Marvel (and DC) character navbox is the answer. Gonnym (talk) 15:46, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Emcgonigle I 100% think that this template should at the very least be divided by sub-franchises, with auto-collapsed sub-sections for each franchises non-primary characters (lesser rogues and supporting characters).
Comic book series tend to have main characters, villains and side-characters that are largely exclusive to the series. That's a somewhat easy division. Obviously the line gets a little blurry with some characters, but there are many that are obvious. Characters like Spidergirl, Peter Parker, Green Goblin, Mary Jane Watson, Harry Olsen, and Gwen Stacy (for instance) are all Spider Man characters. SecretName101 (talk) 02:27, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
From your examples
  • Spider-Girl: 2
  • Peter Parker (redirect to Spider-Man): 18
  • Green Goblin: 6
  • Mary Jane Watson: 3
  • Harry Osborn: 2
  • Gwen Stacy: 6
None of these have only a single character navigation template. Gonnym (talk) 10:57, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UK general election navigation

edit

Obtrusive template which does not help to navigate articles on national UK elections. Better left to templates. Nothing more than a sidebar taking up space. For instance, on the 1802 United Kingdom general election article it appears next to the election infobox but in the middle in the top part of the article. And it appears like that for many articles. Navigation for election articles is best left for templates like navboxes. Plus, not everything needs a sidebar. We have already Template:United Kingdom elections that covers the purpose of this sidebar already. Navboxes are doing the job well and sidebars like these are redundant Also, in terms of finding a way to click a link to these articles, one alternative is to click the link to the preceding or succeeding election articles from the infoboxes on these articles. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:16, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Sidebar template is much more easily accessible. These articles are often lengthy and that bottombox is rather overencumbered Bejakyo (talk) 17:44, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:Leadsidebar, this violates that. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:43, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing there seems to state that Bejakyo (talk) 19:28, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"The placement of a sidebar in the lead is generally discouraged; it may be included on a case-by-case basis, placed preferably after the lead-section image and infobox." There is enough navigation as it is already. Just because a navbox is all the way at the bottom does not mean its not accessible. This is redundant, plus more navigation isn't merited. Articles in these series are already found elsewhere on those articles plus the templates that link to them. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:23, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a "violation" to keep something that is merely "discouraged". ~2025-40406-38 (talk) 23:40, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sidebar can simply not be placed in the lead, and so far as I've seen typicaly isn't in the lead anyway, but the background Bejakyo (talk) 15:13, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It actually placed below the infobox - that's part of the lead section. No such thing as a background. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:32, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Background" is the name of the first section heading in some of the election articles (various other titles are used). This is probably what was being referred to. The point, however, is that the sidebar does NOT appear alongside the lead, but usually alongside the next section, and sometimes the one after that.
In the source, the template is usually coded at the end of the lead, but this is simply a technicality. Moving the template to, say, after the first section heading, does not alter its position on the page (I have tested this on some pages). Since its position is NEVER next to the lead, the appeal to WP:LEADSIDEBAR is spurious. It is the size of the infobox that determines the sidebar's position on the page.
The position of the sidebar is obviously something that concerns you, since the very first word used in the proposal is "obtrusive". However, it cannot be argued that it is both "obtrusive" and in the lead, since wherever it may or may not be "obtruding", it is not obtruding in the lead.
The sidebar's position can be altered horizontally on some pages by removing the clear=none parameter in the template, which disables floating and effectively docks the sidebar against the right hand edge; in some cases this results in the removal of white space to the right of the sidebar and consequently reduces wrapping of the text to the left of it (again, I have tested this on some pages). Not all pages have the clear=none parameter set.
In addition to obtrusiveness and the (bogus) claim that the sidebar is in the lead, a third argument has been that of redundancy. Redundancy is a corollary of choice and in many cases can be quite deliberate (also in systems as a failsafe). Removal of the sidebar will inevitably reduce choice. In this case, the remaining choices will involve a little loss of functionality. The sidebar has links to up to two elections, forward or back, and to up to two MP lists forward or back. The infobox has links to the previous and next election, and to MPs elected in the previous election (outgoing members) and in the titular election (elected members). Thus there is no link to members elected in the following election year, as there is in the sidebar. To go forward or back two elections would require just one extra "click" in the next infobox, and to be fair, that is probably acceptable. Extra clicks would also be required to access the MP list for the following election. Also note that there is no navbox for links to the MP lists. Also note that from the MP list pages, the only link back to an election page is an inline link in the lead to the election year of that parliament. ~2025-41479-54 (talk) 20:31, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As far as I can see this template is never in the lead, so WP:Leadsidebar would not apply in this case. It has not appeared in general election articles since 1987 and not in the MPs articles since 1931. There is no MPs navbox in the general election articles and vice versa. ~2025-40604-97 (talk) 07:30, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with the navigability and user-friendliness of keeping. I am also for KEEP.
disagree with viewing redundancy as a negative. User friendliness often requires redundant navigation options. It is complimentary to bottom-located navboxes SecretName101 (talk) 23:33, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The above TA replying to me above is unnecessarily hostile. The sidebar is in in fact in the lead in majority of uses and this feels like an attempt to just create an aura of hostility toward the nominator. It is in fact used in the lead before the first article section. I find their comments are not adding to this discussion and trying to put blame on me. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:39, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry that you feel that way. I am certainly not trying to blame anyone for anything - blame doesn't come into it, there is nothing to blame anyone for. I wouldn't characterise my comments as "hostile" - that is rather a strong word to use in the context; in a fairly lengthy piece I referred to "you" only once, though perhaps the tone of the first two or three paragraphs could have been a little more temperate. Still, if you perceived it that way, then I am sorry for that.
    Naturally, I would not agree with your assertion that my comments are not adding to the discussion. Much of the above is just factual observations garnered from an extensive, though by no means exhaustive, analysis of the articles concerned. It includes information, particularly about the positioning of the sidebar and whether alternatives are available in the event of its removal, which I felt was relevant and had not previously been adequately discussed. I have examined all 49 of the general election articles and I am sorry to have to say this again, but I cannot see that the sidebar is positioned next to the lead in a single one of them.
    When two people have such opposing perceptions of reality, a rational explanation may be that they are talking at cross-purposes. I can only think that you must have a different definition of what and where the lead is.
    I did say above that the template is usually at the end of the lead source code. But that does not necessarily result in the sidebar being visually next to the lead on the page. I also noted that moving the template to the beginning of the first section (which it is in some articles), does not change the sidebar's position on the page - because that's where it usually is to start with, next to the first section. This is due to the length of the infobox, which, though its template is in the lead source and it is, as you rightly say, considered part of the lead, on the page typically spans the lead text and one or more sections. The fact that the sidebar template is in the lead source therefore means very little - I note that most prior discussion about sidebars in the lead has concerned their visual impact, not where the template is in the source. Discouragement of their use in the lead does not mean a hard and fast rule or an outright ban and in any case carries the implication that sidebars are acceptable outside of the lead (which they effectively are, visually, in these articles).
    Rather than this hair-splitting and rather pointless debate about the lead, the rest of this discussion would do better to focus on more relevant issues, such as whether the sidebars are useful and the potential consequences of their removal. These articles are about a recurring event, so it is reasonable to have navigation links between them. Sidebars provide "quick links" (perhaps analogous to speed dial on phones). The use of this particular sidebar is inconsistent, e.g. it is missing from the election articles for 1918, 1931 and 1992 through 2017, and as stated in the previous post, there is no reverse navigation from the MP articles. This situation could cut both ways - i.e. as an argument for removing the sidebars from those articles that have them, but equally, as an argument for adding them to those that don't.
    Unfortunately, I'm afraid that I cannot let your comment simply go by without noting that rather than engage with any of the substantive points, you make disparaging ad hominem remarks, not to me directly, but to the general audience, while referring to me in the third person, which could be construed as somewhat disrespectful. ~2025-41479-54 (talk) 04:03, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 16:48, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:R to diacritic/Explanation

edit

Unused (not transcluded) template that is linked to from a few category pages. If this is a help page and is still needed, it should be converted to one (moved to the help namespace with the redirect deleted). If it isn't needed, it should be deleted. Gonnym (talk) 07:04, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - WP:T5 applies... --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:15, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would decline a T5 for this case given how the links point to it. Izno (talk) 05:47, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Izno: educate me... Why is it not a T5? It is n unused sub template... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:50, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say it wasn't a T5able case, but that I would decline a T5. My reason is as above. Just because something qualifies for a criterion doesn't mean it should be deleted for such. Izno (talk) 05:52, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 16:48, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:22, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jaxbridges

edit

Redundant to Template:Bridges of Florida. All but one entry is on this navbox. No need for two. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:39, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 08:17, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PCFPEI

edit

OR template with no support for the claims of points of interest in Putnam County, Florida. Some of the entries are town and local communites - not a point of interest like landmarks. Other entries are bridges and islands which are not points of interests. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:33, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 07:47, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:USgovtPOV

edit

"This article is based partially or entirely on public domain works of the U.S. government" is a very specific maintenance template and is not currently used in any article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:41, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Newbzy (talk) 19:16, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:POV map

edit

Hyper-specific maintenance template that isn't practical or useful. Currently three uses in file space (all placed over a decade ago) and one use in main space. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 01:39, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Newbzy (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]


December 19

edit

Template:Intricate template

edit

This template caught my attention after a comment by Primefac: (emphasis omitted)

[W]e should focus [...] on which banners get used, and why we use certain banners over others. There are definitely some warnings that really aren't needed, for example {{Intricate template}} could probably stand to be deleted since almost all intricate templates are likely template-protected anyway (i.e. those who cannot edit the template directly don't need to worry about the complexity of the code)

Template protection is much more tightly controlled nowadays compared to 2005, when this template was created, and we have enough notices now screaming at users to use sandbox before making edits. This template has become unnecessary. FaviFake (talk) 16:48, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This has been on my mind for a while. I 100% agree. Time for this to go. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:56, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hertsa Raion

edit

These raions have been abolished, according to Ternavka, Chernivtsi Oblast, Rukhotyn, and Velykyi Kuchuriv, so the navboxes are no longer usable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:19, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:E-mail user

edit

No transclusions, template parameters, or incoming links to explain why it was created. Created in 2014. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:18, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator's rationale. FaviFake (talk) 12:47, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:History of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth

edit

Only three links. Fails navigation and already covered by two other sidebars. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:10, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:21, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:History of the Third Polish Republic

edit

Both navboxes have too large of a scope for there to be reliable and defined navigation for a topic like this. Both cover almost every event in Poland for the respective periods and contain links to articles that are covered by other navboxes. Such as elections, protests, and matters of international relations. If a subject does not have a respective navbox like for protests, then one should be created. And for some articles, its best to be just covered by a respective Poland subject category if a template does not suffice. But also precedent of Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 December 1#Template:History of Thailand (1932–1973).

Also, not everything needs navbox. There are navboxes covering some of these subjects already and are covering a direct range well enough. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:17, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:21, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Scottish English

edit

Given that this template's counterpart {{Use Scottish English}} redirects to {{Use British English}} (and has since 2016) I suggest we do the same here to make it consistent. As was noted at a previous TFD, MOS:ENGVAR deals with National varieties of English and Scotland is a subnational entity. In any case, we need some consistency here. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:12, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Since this talk page template announces what variety of English is being used (not what should be used) in the corresponding article, it should not simply be redirected. This would leave an incorrect claim about the article. What should happen is that, after an article has been rewritten in British English, the template should be removed. When the template ceases to be used over all articles, deletion will likely be uncontrovertial. Thincat (talk) 15:30, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There are various words or spellings that may be used in an article about Scotland that are not "British English" (whatever that is). Some have English English counterparts, (and it is not clear to me why these should be "rewritten" - do we do this for other varieties of English?) but for others, especially when it comes to the law, but also education, local government etc. it would simply be erroneous to use their alternatives from elsewhere. Ben MacDui 16:49, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    User:Ben MacDui I would point out as an example there is no {{Texan English}} despite there being Texan English. These templates are designed to denote National varieties of English not regional differences. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:01, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the top-level subcomponents of the UK are a bit of a sui generis case. Often they are referred to as countries, or nations, Scotland most especially. Which is further complicated by the fact that the definitions of those terms are loose, used both interchangeably and differently by various organizations and experts. They can be used to designate a sovereign political entity and there are degrees of sovereignty what fun or a cultural community, or a linguistic one. In the past it was the norm, even in RS, to refer to ethnic groups as nations; some authors still do.
I probably would have recommended avoiding this nomination as any practical effect is likely not to be worth the bother it causes people, but we're here I guess.
I don't think consistency itself is an automatic reason to do anything even if one is dead set against using nation with respect to Scotland. Little inconsistencies often exist for a reason fun discussion on VPP right now on that very topic actually and sometimes different kinds of consistency conflict. A slight bit of untidiness is just an inherent part of the wiki way, no need to sniff everything one bumps into closely.
Ultimately I doubt there are any practical issues that could not be solved with some tweaks to the documentation. But this is one of those flamebaity areas I'd rather not spend too much time on even if I had some available maybe not quite on the same level of LAMEness as deciding whether Hiberno or British English is better for NI stuff, but close so I don't intend to take any formal position on this. ~2025-41540-19 (talk) 21:53, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NCAA University and College Division independents football records

edit

These anachronistic templates are no longer in use, and have been replaced with Template:1956 Eastern major college football independents records and Template:1956 Eastern non-major college football independents records and the like. The NCAA University Division and NCAA College Division were not applied to football until 1962. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:50, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support (meaning, Delete) per explanation provided by nominator, including at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football. Dmoore5556 (talk) 23:18, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Largest cities of Cilicia

edit

unused Logoshimpo (talk) 03:06, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:High-density neighborhoods in Los Angeles County

edit

This is a truncation of the full list and is not an improvement, or worth adding, to articles. Logoshimpo (talk) 01:49, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not even sure when the data is from. Template claims it is from 2000, but the source doesn't back that up. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:16, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The 1st statistic for Koreatown is correct. Logoshimpo (talk) 02:41, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Logoshimpo Based on what is it correct? It doesn't even match the info on the article page for Koreatown, Los Angeles... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:10, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[2] Logoshimpo (talk) 03:21, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Logoshimpo I understand that link is on the template, but the page that the link goes to does not have any date associated with the information, does not itself say where the data came from or as of when it is "current". For all I know this is one reporters estimate from 1990... I think in this case it fails verification. In any event, the data as it is currently presented in the template should be deleted. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:15, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:National symbols of Uruguay

edit

Redundant to {{Uruguay topics}} Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:29, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Peru symbols

edit

Redundant to {{Peru topics}}. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:19, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Symbols of Colombia

edit

Redundant to {{Colombia topics}} which has all of this. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:52, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Brazil symbols

edit

Redundant to {{Brazil topics}} which has all this. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:35, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you. I only checked Brazil and not the others. Thincat (talk) 17:35, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]


December 18

edit

Template:Infobox iwi

edit

Propose merging Template:Infobox iwi with Template:Infobox tribe.
WP:CONSOLIDATION. The four distinguishing variables seem to be non-English. Perhaps some or all of them should be kept non-English despite unintelligable on English Wikipedia, and merged as such to Template:Infobox tribe. Alternatively, one or more of them could perhaps be translated into English, and thus applicable for more universal purposes, i.e. other applicable tribes, although in English language. An additional argument would be that there are other variables in proposed merged Template:Infobox tribe which could perhaps be useful also for Iwi-related infobox purposes. PPEMES (talk) 18:37, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The fact that the distinguishing variables seem to be non-English is not relevant... Unless there is some policy I am unaware of (absolutely possible) that says we cannot use non-English variables in an Infobox when they are relevant. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:48, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Whereas the word "tribe" verges on vagueness with its broad definitional range, iwi are a specific type of social and legal organization that merit their own infobox. The iwi infobox displays information that is directly relevant and distinguishing to iwi (and wouldn't be relevant to the vast majority of "tribes"), while the tribe infobox primarily has very broad categories (language, ethnicity, religion) that aren't particularly insightful or distinguishing as far as iwi are concerned. Moreover, while the concepts of rohe, waka, maunga, awa, and moana may be obscure to most of the English-speaking world, they (at least the first three) are well understood in New Zealand and New Zealand English. Pliny the Elderberry (talk) 18:46, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Grand Lodge

edit

Propose merging Template:Infobox Grand Lodge with Template:Infobox fraternity.
WP:INFOCOL. Is there any other distinguishing variable than "Grand Master"? Wouldn't that variable just as relevant to Template:Infobox fraternity? From the other perspective, wouldn't the other variables offered in Template:Infobox fraternity possibly be useful for lodges also? PPEMES (talk) 18:26, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose {{Infobox Grand Lodge}} is already a TRUE wrapper of {{Infobox organization}}. Very little extra code here to maintain, but certainly not something that should be merged to {{Infobox fraternity}}. An argument could be made for merging to {{Infobox organization}} but given that this uses Module:Template wrapper it really isn't necessary. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:38, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox advertising

edit

Propose merging Template:Infobox advertising with Template:Infobox film.
Is there any other distinguishing variable than "client" and "slogan" in Infobox advertising? These variables don't seem less relevant to Infobox film in case of a possible merge, do they? Perhaps the "client" variable could instead be replaced by an e.g. "Produced for" variable in Infobox film, mirroring the preexisting "Produced by" variable there? PPEMES (talk) 18:13, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose a quick look at the transclusions of {{Infobox advertising}} shows that it is NOT just used for video ads (see Think (slogan), Where's Herb? & Lord Kitchener Wants You for example). I'm sorry but PPEMES this fails basic WP:BEFORE.... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:45, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox space agency

edit

Propose merging Template:Infobox space agency with Template:Infobox government agency.
Is there any other distinguishing variable than "spaceport"? Could this variable somehow better be incorporated into the otherwise useful merged template, in order to avoid redundancy? PPEMES (talk) 17:43, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support but PPEMES what do you propose doing with the "Spaceport" value... Do we drop it or find a way to incorporate it into {{Infobox government agency}}? Personally I say drop it and put it in the body of the article... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:34, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Turku wards

edit

Navbox no longer usable after all linked pages were merged. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:36, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This almost is a WP:G8 but doubt that would work... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:48, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jambinai

edit

Three links outside the title page. All links are accessible from the main article on the band. Fails navigation. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:34, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Parties

edit

I'm struggling to see the use of this. It's such a mish-mash of different unrelated events and sundry articles, it can't be claimed that all articles within a template relate to a single, coherent subject per WP:NAVBOX. Better to leave each event to its own navbox, {{Weddings}} for example, otherwise we're linking between such articles as Winter solstice, Casual wear, Balloon modelling and Beer festival for no apparent reason. (Although if there was a beer festival on the solstice with balloon modelling, I'd probably go. In casual wear of course.) --woodensuperman 14:05, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:PingRFCParticipants

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 speedy delete. Speedy deleted per creator's request (WP:G7). Epicgenius (talk) 14:01, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused module. Gonnym (talk) 11:01, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Module:Jctint/MEX

edit

Unused sub module. Gonnym (talk) 10:58, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral/weak delete. This isn't really a submodule. It was intended as a Mexico-specific wrapper around Module:Jctint/core (which is the main implementation module for the Module:Jctint family). However, none of the road articles in Mexico which were supposed to use this module and its associated template ever had conforming junction lists created, and given the state of WP:HWY, it's unlikely they will. I'm not as strong on deleting this one as I am the other road ones below, but it currently serves no purpose, so I can see the rationale. -happy5214 14:31, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:InternalLinkCounter

edit

Unused module. Template:InternalLinkCounter was deleted. Gonnym (talk) 10:57, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Infobox military conflict/configuration

edit

Unused config module. Gonnym (talk) 10:57, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The context of this page is Template talk:Infobox military conflict/Archive 3#I18n. This took enough work that it probably merits sprucing and merging if someone were interested. Izno (talk) 18:16, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Infobox road/areamask/MEX

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 as T5 by BusterD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 14:10, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused data module. Gonnym (talk) 10:56, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Module:Infobox road/locations/labels

edit

Unused data module. Gonnym (talk) 10:56, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Infobox road/locations/data

edit

Unused data module. Gonnym (talk) 10:56, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Philippines Men Basketball Squad 1986 Asian Games

edit

Unused and non-first place sports teams navigation templates. Gonnym (talk) 07:03, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Periodic table/ptg-blind-zh-char

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 as T5 by BusterD (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 14:10, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Gonnym (talk) 07:02, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Nearest neighbour for whole page

edit

Unused template. Gonnym (talk) 06:58, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unused with unclear purpose. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:48, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Element cell/group

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 as T5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:05, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Gonnym (talk) 06:54, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Element cell-named/som-image

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 as T5 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:05, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Gonnym (talk) 06:53, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Dzungar campaign against Kazakhs (1723)

edit

Unused campainbox with only 1 blue link, so nothing to navigate to and from. Gonnym (talk) 06:50, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Villages of Niue

edit

Redundant to Template:Niue topics which already has all these... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:43, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Missing neighborhoods in Los Angeles County

edit

missing nomination from Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_December_13#Template:10_Asian_neighborhoods_in_Los_Angeles_County Logoshimpo (talk) 03:44, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

state largest cities

edit

These are the only state largest cities templates that are unused. Logoshimpo (talk) 02:54, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was unaware of this template. But it seems like a nice template, so I have added it to several of the articles on the largest cities in Alabama. EulerianTrail (talk) 04:18, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you added them back after I removed them due to them not being navboxes. We don't keep templates due to them looking good. Logoshimpo (talk) 00:32, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Athletics at the 2026 Summer Youth Olympics

edit

All links are to articles that currently do not exist (and likely will not until late 2026). Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:25, 18 December 2025 (UTC) Also propose this:[reply]


December 17

edit

Template:Camp Orange

edit

All articles are either red links or redirects to the main article Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:03, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Bolivia medical cases

edit

Basing this nomination on a similar Tfd from October 2024.

These COVID data template pages have either no transclusions or a few and are all or mostly:

1) out of date 2) In violation of WP:NOTDATABASE 3) In Violation of WP:NOTSTATS

These templates appear to contain what is normally article content, and they are linked from the "Data" section of COVID-19 pandemic navbox, which violates our guidelines on linking from article space to other namespaces including from templates. The transclusions coming from the navbox add more than what appears to be direct transclusions with use of a template.

If any are single-use, i.e. being used only on one article, I would argue against subst and delete due to the outdated chart is no longer going to serve any purpose.

Five years ago, they were useful to have. Now, five years later, we don't have a need for these anymore. Delete and remove transclusions.

Bear in mind, this is the first batch of templates. The entire lot needs to be deleted. But this is the first step in the process. Most editors are no longer editing this information as Covid cases and deaths are not as significant anymore to keep a tally of and the world is not in a state of pandemic anymore. We just no longer have a need for these. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:00, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Canada medical cases by province is updated daily, the statistics are relevant to the articles it accompanies, and all of it is sourced from federal, provincial and territorial health sites, all of them named in each entry. ~2025-32525-60 (talk) 01:51, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if up-kept; modifications as needed.
Hello, a culprit of those tables here - I think the tables still have the layouts that I designed.
This data has crucial value in often being irreplaceable and of scholarly (etc.) interest. Crucially, they record daily counts that the official releases often don't care about - typical to see official releases that either show the cumulative or overwrite old numbers with new ones. So at minimum they need archiving.
For actively maintained tables, I'm strongly keep. Like someone said above, at least Canada cases are being updated daily with current relevance.
I would argue that those are discriminate collections of data, as they include strictly only specific items of info with a single consistent set of criteria, so WP:NOTDATABASE and its sub-rule Wikipedia:NOTSTATS don't incontrovertibly apply here. The issue here is, it just so happens that the set of "notable info" here is hard to split in any non-arbitrary way. This is unlike the "list of Norwegian bands" example where we expect only notable Norwegian bands; we simply have one set called Covid case numbers, by the day (/week, etc.). "Covid situation" is in general still rather notable, and may unfortunately become very notable at anytime in the near future; it would be unwise to kill actively maintained tables only to restore them later and face an awkward blank.
Still, in cases where the table has not been maintained for a good while, clearly the notability has become questionable. If either it is no longer practical to restore the data or the data can be retrieved elsewhere, deletion is clearly fine (but archive first!).
Modifications:
A couple of ideas to improve issues of current tables.
1) Getting bulky, where one table covers all cases from the beginning unto eternity. My suggestion is either to split off parts of the table, or to flip the row order so that the newest is at the top. When I sort of designed the first few tables I wasn't expecting for a pandemic lasting indefinitely (profound naïveté; besides the point). If I had expected for a long-ish pandemic, I would have at least inverted the row order so that the newest comes at the top. Scrolling all the way to the bottom feels a bit silly to me personally.
2) Ill-fitting layout. I suggest re-sizing the tables with timescales appropriate for the given period; e.g. a weekly release means rows of weeks, not of dates. The Canada table for example still uses the 2020 "daily" row layout, but that was because back then numbers were being released daily; it was for the same reason that the rows weren't by the hour or half-day. I do in fact remember perhaps it was South Korea that had a few half-day rows in 2020 - because the data was being released twice per day and the data was notable, not because we adored that split. Rethliopuks (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Only one out of this batch is updated, but that one template that is is being done by one user, a TA of all people. Most editors are not concerned with updating this info anymore. Any information on total from 2020 can be included as part of the article instead of on a separate space. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:36, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete they may have been useful at the height of the pandemic and a IAR exception of the the NOTDATABASE & NOTSTATS violations were ok. But now 5 years on and these are wildly out of date a not useful. Any argument for keeping them is based on the idea that someone would take charge of keeping them up to date... Even if that were true, they still violate NOTDATABASE & NOTSTATS. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:55, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox non-emergency number

edit

Not sure if there are other infoboxes like this, but this infobox seems unnecessary for a phone number. The information conveyed in it generally isn't complex enough to warrant an infobox, and it has a limited use case (for example, Template:Infobox emergency number doesn't exist). Additionally, the formatting is weird and it appears very big. HurricaneZetaC 19:59, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as both unnecessary and undiscussed creation - didn't go through any template equivalent of AfC which would have very likely stopped its publication 10mmsocket (talk) 20:20, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Anti-austerity movement in the European Union

edit

Per WP:Leadsidebar and per no main article exists for this topic and for a template like this to cover a political bloc like the EU. And template is too broad for one template to cover even for a sidebar. Best left to a navbox. But now there is no need for a navbox for this subject. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:39, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:St. Louis Cardinals in brief

edit

A bad use of a template for a sidebar even. All links are featured on the main team navbox and easily accessible from the infobox on the main team article. A sidebar like this is not needed. Even per WP:Leadsidebar. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:34, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:EIW

edit

Unused simple (MOS:EGG) link template. Gonnym (talk) 10:27, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:B-Kreuz

edit

More unused Bundesstraße-related templates. See also previous discussion. Gonnym (talk) 10:20, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:DART M

edit

Unused. Probably replaced with Module:Adjacent stations/M-Line Trolley. Gonnym (talk) 10:10, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

edit

Unused. I've replaced the less than 5 transclusions this had with Module:Adjacent stations/Dallas Area Rapid Transit. Gonnym (talk) 10:10, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Reduce to stub

edit

This is a completely unnecessary template. We shouldn't place editing history information in article space. And in the talk space, this also isn't needed. If the removal of content was wrong, revert. If it was right, then this is a non-issue. Gonnym (talk) 10:04, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AAFC Roster template list

edit

Unused. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:58, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old discussions

edit

December 16

college football independents records

[edit]

These templates are no longer in use as they have been superseded by Template:1947 Eastern major college football independents records and Template:1947 Eastern non-major college football independents records and the like. Jweiss11 (talk) 20:48, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 10:43, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Copyvio plot

[edit]

This banner warns against adding copyvios to the plot sections of articles. It works great as an edit notice, but is sometimes used as a talk page banner. I would be shocked if anyone has ever:

  1. Been intent on ripping off a plot summary,
  2. looked at the talk page before actually editing the article,
  3. found this banner in the sea of talk page banners, and finally,
  4. actually listened to its advice.

On the talk page it is just a source of banner blindness. If particular articles have persistent copyvios, an <!-- invisible comment --> in the plot section itself would be much more effective. Or use the edit notice! I am proposing that we make this into an edit notice only template, and remove the talk page transclusions. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:27, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can an edit notice be created automatically for any plot-related article? Television series, season, episodes, list of episodes, film, video game, etc.? If not, then is one supposed to be created for each article? Gonnym (talk) 10:45, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: I don't think that an edit notice is needed to display it on all such articles—just the ones which are hazard to copy/pasting, like articles completely lacking a plot summary. There is no reliable way (that I know of) to detect all such articles; the pre-existing edit notices provided by Module:Mainspace editnotice all rely on some universal determination method (e.g. checking for the existence of a draft page with the same title or the presence of Category:Living people). Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:39, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm all in favor of reducing banner blindness, but if the other option is creating thousand of edit notices, then I'll oppose that as the lesser of the two evil. Maybe if Module:Mainspace editnotice can be set to detect for the existence of the section titled "Plot", "Series overview" or "Synopsis" the automatic edit notice can work, which would eliminate the need of creating those edit notice pages manually. Gonnym (talk) 13:23, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: I suppose I could've been more clear in my nomination: I am proposing that we remove it from all talk pages, and editors can naturally add an edit notice if necessary. As I said in the nomination, I highly doubt this banner on the talk page has ever stopped a copyvio, so I don't think its mass removal from talk pages will have any effect other than reducing banner blindness. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 04:28, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, ok. You weren't proposing we replace the usage with edit notices. So yeah, no problem with deleting. Gonnym (talk) 08:53, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per above discussion, this is best handled as an edit notice on selected pages. I'm willing to do this, since edits in the editnotice space are restricted by an entry on the global blacklist. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:09, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Baptized in

[edit]

This template is used in either the lead or infobox. The baptism date is not part of MOS:OPENPARABIO or MOS:BIRTHDATE, and Template:Infobox person uses a dedicated parameter, |baptised=. In both situations the template should not be used and the date itself either removed or used in the correct infobox place. Gonnym (talk) 16:35, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sudan culture

[edit]

This is basically a duplicate of Template:Culture of Sudan which was merged at this TFD. Don't need to redebate this.... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:40, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Jf-JSON

[edit]

Unused; superseded by Scribunto. sapphaline (talk) 14:05, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 15

Template:Infobox cricket country season

[edit]

Only 3 pages are using this infobox which should be replaced with the standard {{Infobox cricket season}}. Vestrian24Bio 13:15, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 14

Largest cities of China provincial templates

[edit]

See Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_November_22#Template:Most_populous_cities_in_Yunnan. Logoshimpo (talk) 23:24, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What if we add a section Cities in the provinces article, and integrate the templates? Like New York (state)#Cities and towns. I'm not complaining about this, I know some templates have been deleted many years ago. I don’t believe that simply deleting non-vandalism content is a constructive approach. But I'm lazy on editing, if yous decided to delete, I'm fine with the result.--Xiliuheshui · chat 23:57, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
user:Gonnym, user:Frietjes, and user:瑞丽江的河水: Template:Most populous cities in Guizhou lists 15 entries, Template:Most populous cities in Shaanxi lists 16 entries and the embedded list at New York (state)#Cities and towns lists 10 entries. These templates aren't doing their job to standardize formatting and design. Logoshimpo (talk) 01:42, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Logoshimpo: please read BLUDGEONING. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:41, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete. Subst into the provinces article per Xiliuheshui and delete the templates. These are not navigation templates but content placed in the navigation template sections. Gonnym (talk) 10:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't seem to make sense as I see you commented on one of the deletion discussions in Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 December 7. Logoshimpo (talk) 02:17, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No idea what you want. Gonnym (talk) 16:17, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TCMDb name

[edit]

Per WP:ELNO #16. TCMDb no longer exists. Nardog (talk) 13:49, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Checked a few cases and the links no longer work. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:00, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Z. Patterson (talk) 03:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as archive URL ELNO #16 - I doubt it means dead sites. The example provided is something else. In time, every link on Wikipedia will die, which means every link would be deleted from Wikipedia. Makes no sense. This is why we have archive URLs, archive bots, and a policy to save dead links with archive URLs. A dead site is not reason alone to delete. The template can be easily converted to archive URLs. The question is: why not. Nobody has addressed the content removal. As for conversion to AFI, this is wishful. It requires a custom slug (code) that is not obtainable except by manual searching the AFI website at least 9,000 times. That would take years of effort. Fine if you want. In the mean time conversion to archive URLs will retain the content that is otherwise missing because there is no AFI link. -- GreenC 19:21, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as archive URL per GreenC. --Grufo (talk) 14:12, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as archive URL WP:ELNO #16 - Website archeology of tcmdb : early versions of the site use Leonard Maltin publications for metadata, later using AFI Catalog, at least for American Films.
to use web.archive.org you would need to derive cold-turkey or Cold-Turkey (for example)
The Good Reason to keep, is that during its middle period, many films cataloged included essays which deserve noting
In this case they replaced the original article with something oddly written
perhaps it was no longer a portal to DVD sales and not a direct profit-making use of "resources"
@GreenC "manual searching the AFI website at least 9,000 times" ... search: "____" site:catalog.afi.com Piñanana (talk) 21:43, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TCMDb title

[edit]

Per WP:ELNO #16. TCMDb no longer exists. Nardog (talk) 13:49, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and replace with Template:AFI film. Archives show that the data was powered by American Film Institute so any film that used this template can be replaced with Template:AFI film. Because they've shutdown the site intentionally and are a for-profit website, we shouldn't give them free traffic and instead should send the traffic to the nonprofit. When replacing the templates, the end result shouldn't be two AFI film templates (if one already existed). See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film#Turner Classic Movie Database and articles gone. Gonnym (talk) 19:30, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They are getting no traffic. The link is dead. The clicks would go to the archive URL which is a non-profit. -- GreenC 19:25, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The traffic will still reach it from exposure. Gonnym (talk) 11:03, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and replace with Template:AFI film per Gonnym. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:43, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as archive URL ELNO #16 - I doubt it means dead sites. The example provided is something else. In time, every link on Wikipedia will die, which means every link would be deleted from Wikipedia. Makes no sense. This is why we have archive URLs, archive bots, and a policy to save dead links with archive URLs. A dead site is not reason alone to delete. The template can be easily converted to archive URLs. The question is: why not. Nobody has addressed the content removal. As for conversion to AFI, this is wishful. It requires a custom slug (code) that is not obtainable except by manual searching the AFI website at least 9,000 times. That would take years of effort. Fine if you want. In the mean time conversion to archive URLs will retain the content that is otherwise missing because there is no AFI link. -- GreenC 19:22, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as archive URL per GreenC. Editors will still be able to replace the template with Template:AFI film on a case-by-case basis when deemed opportune. --Grufo (talk) 14:07, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The TCM database was not just a copy of what is found on the AFI website; AFI is limited to American films, whereas TCM also had records for several films produced outside the United States. An example of this would be Alfred Hitchcock's 1929 film Blackmail. Observer1632 (talk) 15:00, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as archive URL WP:ELNO #16 - Website archeology of tcmdb : early versions of the site use Leonard Maltin publications for metadata, later using AFI Catalog, at least for American Films.
to use web.archive.org you would need to derive cold-turkey or Cold-Turkey (for example)
The Good Reason to keep, is that during its middle period, many films cataloged included essays which deserve noting
In this case they replaced the original article with something oddly written
perhaps it was no longer a portal to DVD sales and not a direct profit-making use of "resources"
@GreenC "manual searching the AFI website at least 9,000 times" ... search: "____" site:catalog.afi.com Piñanana (talk) 21:49, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 13

Template:Neighborhoods of Huntington, West Virginia

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Neighborhoods of Huntington, West Virginia with Template:Huntington, West Virginia.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:36, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Syracuse Neighborhoods

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Syracuse Neighborhoods with Template:Syracuse, New York.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:36, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Miami Neighborhoods

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Miami Neighborhoods with Template:Miami.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:35, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Oakland, California neighborhoods

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Oakland, California neighborhoods with Template:Oakland, California.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:32, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on this one I agree with Pi... Box already rather large. No need to cram more in there... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 07:56, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While in general I am for merging these types, this seems like one that is best left separate. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:40, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Providence neighborhoods

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Providence neighborhoods with Template:Providence, Rhode Island.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:27, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nomination. No need for a separate box. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:18, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Smyrna, GA neighborhoods

[edit]

Only one article. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:14, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiCleanerMan: I can expand it to be about the whole city. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:33, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You need articles first then a navbox. I don't think you will be fast enough to create at least five links for a navbox. Plus, the one article is suspect for GNG. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:17, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiCleanerMan: Typically I collect five articles before making a navbox. The school district, the relevant high school, any shopping mall, and any airport should push it to five at least. Any National Register of Historic Places sites in the Smyrna city limits should push it higher. If there's an Amtrak station, that can do it too... I'll try now. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:21, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found the relevant school district (in Georgia law, school districts are independent governments), a public comprehensive high school in the city limits, a list of mayors of Smyrna, and the public library. There is a covered bridge associated with Smyrna, though it lies outside the city limits. See PDF p. 4/6 and compare with the actual location of the covered bridge. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:48, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:10 Asian neighborhoods in Los Angeles County

[edit]

Article content on template space violates WP:Template namespace. Subst and delete. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:13, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Minneapolis neighborhoods

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Minneapolis neighborhoods with Template:Minneapolis.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:07, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - but... WikiCleanerMan do you propose to keep the neighborhoods in their own rows or merge them all to 1 row... Format for the merge should be discussed here and agreed upon. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:13, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Own row. The current city navbox is hardly too large right now. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:18, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neighborhoods of San Francisco

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Neighborhoods of San Francisco with Template:San Francisco.
Can easily go on the main navbox. No need for a separate navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:03, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:12, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. These templates are already quite large and combining them will make the final template large, cumbersome, difficult to navigate and somewhat overwhelming. (see also Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_December_13#Template:Oakland,_California_neighborhoods. Yeah, I know about WP:WHATABOUTISM, but the subject of size often comes up when a suggestion is made to combine already large templates) See WP:NAV-WITHIN regarding size of templates. Consensus there is to have more, smaller templates than fewer, larger templates.
  2. Some entries appear in both templates (Alamo Square, Fisherman's Wharf, The Presidio, perhaps others) Where will these be placed in the combined template?
  3. The "above" and "below" sections are specific to the templates. How will these be combined?
--Lexiconaut (talk) 02:59, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The "above" and "below" sections link to the same place, easy to make that place be the header for the neighborhood section... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:19, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neighborhoods of San Diego

[edit]

Redundant to Template:San Diego. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:59, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Duplicate information. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:12, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - preserve existing format as a sub-box in {{San Diego}}. -Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 03:06, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. The layout in Template:Neighborhoods of San Diego is much cleaner and easier to navigate than in the corresponding section in Template:San Diego. A better solution would be to delete the neighborhoods section in Template:San Diego and leave both templates. (see WP:NAV-WITHIN regarding size of navigational templates.)
  2. If consensus is to not have two templates, then the content of Template:Neighborhoods of San Diego should be merged into Template:San Diego.
  3. There are a number of unlinked and red-linked neighborhood names in both templates. They should be confirmed not to have a Wikipedia page (e.g., some may have pages such as Neighborhood name, San Diego although the wikilink in the template is to Neighborhood name. Any remaining red-links should be deleted per WP:EXISTING
--Lexiconaut (talk) 02:44, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We don't need a navbox for everything. This navbox is redundant and is not needed. San Diego navbox is doing the job just fine. And meeting the nav-within already. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 03:22, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per my above comments, I agree with parts of what both Lexiconaut and WikiCleanerMan have said. So I propose this compromise which merges the 2 navboxes, but keeps the separate districts of {{Neighborhoods of San Diego}}. Thoughts? (Note this is a proof of concept... I have not verified all links are present...) Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:30, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:List has been split

[edit]

This is a simple wrapper for {{Mbox}} adding a message "This list has been split for improved performance." It is currently used on 60 mainspace list articles (about 20 groups of 2–6 sibling sublists; about 5 parents of child sublists). Issues are as follows:

  1. the message violates WP:SELFREF and has cross-namespace links. The average reader does not know or care about splitting and performance; the message is likely to confuse by answering a question the reader not only did not ask but does not understand.
  2. {{Mbox}} has the wrong semantics. This is obvious in mobile view, in which the contents are collapsed with a "learn more" toggle link, expanding into a "section issues" notice.
  3. The template is ugly and not user friendly. Look at List of disco artists (F–K) — how many readers will be helped by the template?
  4. The template is redundant. Standardised boilerplate templates is useful in complex scenarios with good styling, but this is so crude that it saves no labour compared to hand-editing a sentence linking to the next/previous part of the list. Alternative templates include navigation templates (e.g. featured list England cricket team Test results (1975–1989) has {{England cricket team results}}) or {{main}} (e.g. Japanese conjugation has both {{main}} and {{List has been split}} on some sections; the latter adds nothing.)

I suggest in the short term, delete the template and replace {{List has been split|Foo}} with {{Centre|Sublists: Foo}}. Editors can further prettify thereafter at leisure. jnestorius(talk) 19:11, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uma Musume Pretty Derby

[edit]

The navbox is very limited and should most likely be deleted because of how small it is, warranted that there are only 4 articles linked in here, with the majority being characters from the Umamusume: Pretty Durby franchise, which could be easily found without a navbox. ConeKota (talk) 16:30, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We can perhaps merge it with Template:Cygames? --Jnglmpera (talk) 01:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikidataCoord

[edit]

Propose merging Template:WikidataCoord with Template:Coord.
It has come to my attention that these two templates, which used to function differently, now duplicate behvior. In a recent discussion this was clarified. For context, my current understanding is that:


  • {{coord}} used to not support pulling from wikidata. It now does with {{coord|display=i}} (for example)
  • {{coord}} used to not support pulling from a specific QID, It now does with {{coord|qid=Q1234}}

At this point, I see no reason that these cannot be merged. Note the parameters are structured differently in the two templates so a simple redirect is not possible at this time. Most uses will have to be manually converted (should be able to write a bot script to help out). If I am missing something and someone can point out a reason that these 2 templates need to coexist, I will happily withdraw this, but I did try to do my research first. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 04:49, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Midland attractions

[edit]

No entries. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:34, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per nom. ConeKota (talk) 16:31, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - tried to speedy delete, but couldn't find a speedy cat it would really fit under... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:19, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 12

Template:Chávez presidency

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Chávez presidency with Template:Hugo Chávez.
Two templates for the same thing. Per precedent of American president templates. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:13, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support, seems reasonable.--ReyHahn (talk) 14:04, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 11

Template:Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research graphical timeline

[edit]

Unused timeline. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:11, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not unused; it was temporarily <!-- hidden --> two weeks ago due to a mobile site formatting problem.
Pinging @Peter NYC and @Pigsonthewing: Did you ever figure out how to make it work? Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 75#Template covering content doesn't look like is was successful, though that might have been a caching problem. Should we ask for help at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)? WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:26, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't able to fix it, and it is a Desktop issue as well.  == Peter NYC 23:51, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then is it safe to delete? WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:44, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Four Regency Temples of Lhasa

[edit]

2 links. Not enough for a navbox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 23:08, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would 3 be enough? --Reiner Stoppok (talk) 10:35, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but it is a template (as the title says), and it is a relatively common English term for them. --Reiner Stoppok (talk) 15:28, 14 December 2025 (UTC) PS: Move it back to Template:Four gLing bzhi or tell us a better English title.[reply]
A mention in two books is not "relatively common". This navbox fails WP:NAVBOX items 2 and 4, and possibly more. I have no objections to this template being recreated when there is a main article and four or more articles to link from the navbox body. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, it is a Brill publication, and there are only four (alltogether), as expressed in the Tibetan term (bzhi). --Reiner Stoppok (talk) 17:26, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 10

Template:Approximate track gauge metric

[edit]

Duplicates {{Track gauge|500 mm}} → 500 mm (19+3⁄4 in) minus the word "about". If the calculations of {{Track gauge}} are incorrect, then that template should be fixed instead of creating duplicate forks. Gonnym (talk) 17:45, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the thing is, how do I preserve as much of the original info as I can while fixing invalid track gauge errors?
it's not about the calculations of {{track gauge}} being incorrect, it's about invalid track gauges. I have updated the example inputs accordingly. Oreocooke (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: it seems like the main purpose/effect of this template is to bypass Category:Articles using Template:Track gauge with unrecognized input.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 06:17, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
probably, but still the dilemna Oreocooke (talk) 16:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
subst per above (but don't delete until fully abandoned). Oreocooke (talk) 16:42, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-aadblock

[edit]

Propose merging Template:Uw-aadblock with Template:Uw-adblock.
Other than {{uw-ipevadeblock}} and the catch-all {{uw-ablock}}, this is the only block template that is specifically hardcoded to say "Anonymous users from this IP address". Given that we don't have {{uw-avblock}} for {{uw-vblock}}, {{uw-adeblock}} for {{uw-deblock}}, etc., and especially given the rollout of temporary accounts last month, I don't see any reason why this should be a standalone template, hence why I'm nominating it for merging. Sugar Tax (talk) 17:04, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge per nom. IPs don't have editors on them anymore so leaving specially-crafted block templates on IP talk pages is pointless. If I've missed some critical counterargument, please ping me. Toadspike [Talk] 17:20, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
support nom. templates specifically for IP editors don't have much use, especially since the recent introduction of temporary accounts to enwiki. Oreocooke (talk) 19:14, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
support per nom. if needed the "anonymous users" part can be parameterized Oreocooke (talk) 16:39, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 9

Template:NASCAR on Speed

[edit]

Propose merging Template:NASCAR on Speed with Template:NASCAR on Fox.
I propose Template:NASCAR on Speed is merged into Template:NASCAR on Fox, for the same reasons I'm proposing their respective articles to be merged in the same fashion. The two programs might as well be one and the same, given the common ownership and similarities in coverage they both had. JHD0919 (talk) 18:53, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:25, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now - Merge IFF the articles merge. As long as the articles are separate, it makes sense to have separate templates. Suggest closing with no prejudice on renominating and merging if the articles are indeed merged. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:13, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1912 Texas Intercollegiate Athletic Association football standings

[edit]

Unused standings table template. Gonnym (talk) 13:08, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as now used. @Gonnym: it looks like the wrong template was being used on the relevant article. This edit fixed it so it is now used... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 07:37, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good to know. I'm fine with keeping. Gonnym (talk) 10:59, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: safe for me to close this as "withdrawn" (or you can do it of course)? I don't like doing that without explicit "permission" from the original poster...
@WikiCleanerMan and JHD0919: for transparency, please see above comment about this template now being correctly used. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:22, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Single-use. Subst and delete. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:22, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete per WCM. JHD0919 (talk) 16:24, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 8

Template:Use Jamaican English

[edit]

As with several former 'Use X English' templates, this template is redundant to Use British English. As stated on the template page, it is an instruction to use 'Jamaican English spelling, which, as noted in the article, is the same as British English spelling.' Dgp4004 (talk) 19:03, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete & Replace with {{Use British English}} the template/doc itself states that it is the same as {{Use British English}}... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:46, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete These templates have no purpose and carry an implausible suggestion that an editor has to study Jamaican English before editing an affected article. Johnuniq (talk) 00:13, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Vestrian24Bio 11:56, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Replace with {{Use British English}} as not usable here on the English Wikipedia. The effort of having articles identified as using British English spelling and word choices should not be lost; do not simply delete transclusions outright.
    This "Use X English" family of templates is intended to provide editors with advice about word choice ("truck" v. "lorry"), spelling ("color" v. "colour"), and occasionally grammatical construction ("Since 1960" v. "From 1960"). Other than those differences, writers at the English Wikipedia are supposed to follow MOS:COMMONALITY, writing in standard English that can be understood by the most readers. The article at Jamaican English describes phonology, which is not relevant for a written encyclopedia. It spends one sentence on grammar, providing no guidance other than that it is similar to British English. The lead says that "Jamaican English tends to follow British English spelling conventions". The article provides zero examples of how written Jamaican English differs from British English; any examples of Jamaican Patois would fail to conform with MOS:COMMONALITY, and any such words should be glossed for non-Jamaican readers. The article provides no real guidance about how to write in Jamaican English that is different enough from guidance that would be provided for British English, so this template is not useful or usable (TFD reason 3) on the English Wikipedia. The {{Use British English}} template provides appropriate guidance for editors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:46, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:02, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - strongly disagree with nom and all prior delete votes above (no normative backing to any reasons given; and no, COMMONALITY has no bearing on these TfDs, despite how often it pops up in these - cf this extensive MOS talk re COMMONALITY's applicability here) - would actually vote delete due to {{ties}} and consensus in the aforementioned MOS talk (as I did for UCarE and UBelE) except that (i) this is already an established template [used more often than {{IUPAC spelling}} and {{IUPAC spelling US}} even; cf Wikipedia articles by national variety of English]; (ii) this template quite obviously meets none of the WP:TFD#REASONS [for 2, note that Wikipedia is not an IRS on anything, much less linguistics - one has merely to open a JamE dictionary or look up the tonnes of scholarship on JamE to see that JamE != BrE, regardless of what Wikipedia says, and despite the fact that JamE is similar to BrE (as are a bunch of other Englishes obviously); cf WP:CARIB/E for a non-IRS overview]. Finally, note that if we were to accept nom and prior delete vote rationales, we'd basically end up w/ only Use X English templates for BrE, AmE, and possibly CanE, as once we've disregarded how heavily a template is used and whether it actually meets any TFD#REASONS, we'd find the Use X English templates of all quasi-BrE Englishes (AusE, NZE, etc) "redundant" on the basis of non-IRS sources - really can't overstate how silly that all seems in light of MOS:ENGVAR. (But if that's really what we want then I'd vote delete in a group [not piecemeal] TfD for all Use X English templates of all quasi-BrE Englishes [but to be replaced by {{ties}}, not {{AmE}} nor {{BrE}}].) – Asdfjrjjj (talk) 00:18, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    User:Asdfjrjjj trying to understand here... What is the difference between Jamaican English and British English when it comes to writing and spelling? Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:23, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    To editor Zackmann08: prolly same as diff as b/w NZE vs BrE or AusE vs BrE imo (ie only slight spelling diff; but a bit more vocab/idiom/convention diffs, even in the written formal register - enough such that linguistic consensus is JamE != BrE, just like NZE != BrE and AusE != BrE, regardless of how similar they seem to non-Jamaicans, non-Aussies, non-Kiwis [what exactly the threshold is for linguists to say English dialect x != y rather than x = y is a question for linguists/lexicographers/researchers, not any of us here imo]). Best I can do is WP:CARIB/E, but cf actual IRSs there and in Ggl Scholar for details! - Asdfjrjjj (talk) 01:00, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably? Therein lies the problem I'm afraid. The case for retention always falls down when asked to give some solid examples of what a template is actually for. These templates, which are completely hidden from readers, exist primarily to instruct editors in a clear and unambiguous way what sort of spelling is in use in an article. That's all they do. They aren't there to bolster national pride or somehow take possession of an article.
    No case has been made that this template differs significantly from any of the others which use British English spelling and which have been deleted. Dgp4004 (talk) 23:19, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    To editor Dgp4004: ehh I disagree on their purpose - imo
    • they do not necessarily instruct "in a clear and unambiguous way" wrt spelling (eg I know no NZE, so {{NZE}} gives me only a vague idea of what spelling to use, and I feel that may be the case for vars non-Kiwi editors, and likewise for AusE and {{AusE}}, and so on), and
    • they do not instruct editors only wrt spelling (eg {{BrE}} further gives me an idea of what date formats, weights and measures, grammar conventions, vocabulary, etc to follow or prefer, as does {{AmE}}, as I have a sort-of-good feel for both BrE and AmE, and I feel that may be the case for vars editors, and likewise for {{NZE}} and editors with a feel for NZE [eg Kiwis], and so on).
    For sure agree re national pride/possession of articles though, with the major caveat that whereas ENGVAR and general WP spirit/principles give no national variety of English precedence over any others, some discussions re the varieties of English of smaller Anglophone nations (like Jamaica) imo seem to turn on how well editors know said variety sans reference to IRSs (ie not well, ofc), thereby establishing de facto prejudice/systemic bias against varieties of English of smaller Anglophone nations, contrary to ENGVAR and WP spirit/principles (imo, ofc). I feel like that's the main thrust of my keep vote. But if deletionists can find in IRSs a principled test of dialectal similarity (w/c imo is what you guys need here to deem these JamE templates redundant to BrE templates per TFD#REASONS no 2), then again, I'd for sure vote delete in a group TfD for the Use x Eng templates of all dialects which failed such test (as imo this seems like the only way to pre-empt the aforementioned prejudice/systemic bias).
    Ps I disagree that the burden of proof falls on retentionists (to show that "x Eng dialect is not too similar to y Eng dialect"), and don't really think proving that negative will help much here (imo it's not the main divide in this discussion; as long as the test of dialectal similarity ignores non-spelling aspects of dialects, or relies on non-IRS principles/means/sources, or both, no amount of IRS evidence would help further discussion imo), but here's a few IRSs and egs nonetheless:
    • every entry in the Dictionary of JamE [CUP, 1980] (not flagged as informal/colloquial/etc) is an entirely novel word, or else a word with a novel use or sense, in formal written JamE - eg (taking the first such DJE entry, ie aachi ["a river fish"] in p. 1), "aachi in the Black River" is a valid [if possibly non-factual] phrase in formal written JamE, but is nonsense in BrE, AmE, etc - similarly for the next such entry in DJE (abbay [Elaeis guineensis or its fruit] in p. 2), "abbays resemble small coconuts" is a valid phrase in formal written JamE, but not in BrE, AmE, etc - and so on to p. 509;
    • every JamE term or sense added to the OED in 2021 was unique to JamE (or CarE) prior to OED import - eg "sucking a snowball" is valid in any Eng dialect, but means one thing in JamE (and CarE; means having shaved ice) vs another thing in other Eng dialects (might mean licking a ball of snow or having a confection resembling a ball of snow, etc) - and so on;
    • plus loads of other IRSs in WP:CARIB/E and Ggl Scholar in general.
    - Asdfjrjjj (talk) 08:01, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    As ever, it's difficult to respond to a wall of text but I'll try to be succinct:
    - The existence of other weakly explained or poorly justified templates is a weak defence for this one.
    - There is a separate template for British-style dates which is {{Use dmy dates}}. And as per the manual of style and this RfC, there is very little in the way of grammar that these templates can affect.
    - Again, the existence of other templates is a weak argument for the retention of this one.
    - This template is not 'Use Jamaican phrases'. And 'sucking', 'a' and 'snowball' are spelt the same in every English variant in any case, so would not be picked up by a bot. Dgp4004 (talk) 06:56, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: I notified Wikipedia:WikiProject Caribbean and Wikipedia:WikiProject Jamaica. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:26, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: It's just British spellings, nothing to get excited about. We don't need this template. Oaktree b (talk) 17:30, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: Someone needs to check the Dictionary of Jamaican English to find what the Jamaicans use for aubergine or eggplant (UK and US words for the same vegetable). If said word is "baigan" (with proof that this is proper formal, standardized Jamaican English, demonstrated in government and newspaper pages), I will vote keep and implore deletion admins to reconsider previous responses. This is an important word because Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Opportunities for commonality cannot apply to it (a common name for this vegetable does not exist), and it is an important word when discussing agriculture and food services. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:20, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Adding a template to a page does not require editors to lose their minds—if there is good reason to write "baigan", that word would be used regardless of any template. A good reason might be that it is in a quote. Johnuniq (talk) 06:24, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Even if baigan is more frequently used in Jamaica, most of the rest of the world would not know what baigan is. My autocorrect does not even recognize what baigan but does recognize eggplant and aubergine. Using baigan outside of a quote would just decrease accessibility. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 16:48, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If it is the Dictionary of Jamaican English by Cassidy and Le Page you mean, I just checked that. The only entry to refer to Solanum melongena that isn't called obsolete is:

    GARDEN EGG sb gen. The egg-plant, Solanum melongena.

    1811 Titford xiii, Garden Egg. (Solanum Melongena.) Cut in slices,
    parboiled and fried) resembles fried eggs. 1913 Harris 31, Garden
    Egg..It is grown to a considerable extent in Jamaica, especially by
    coolie market-gardeners near Kingston. 1952 FGC several parishes
    /gyaadn-eg/. (p. 195)

    In the definitions, egg-plant and garden-egg are used interchangeably. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 13:14, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Week delete: per above, with the exception for the above comment(s), there shouldn’t be any reason to keep this template and that British English should be used in place of it PieWriter (talk) 03:11, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whatever the case, can someone remove the very visible template deletion notice from articles? It will do nothing but confuse as the actual template is invisible. CMD (talk) 04:34, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It has to stay until this discussion is closed I'm afraid. Which is probably overdue now I think. Dgp4004 (talk) 14:13, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Asdfjrjjj, who expressed my exact thoughts. Bizarre BizarreTalk modern to me 19:41, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Jamaican English is not exactly the same as British English. For example, the standard spelling of scallion in Jamaican English is skellion. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Lexeme:L327183 عُثمان (talk) 00:15, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't find 'skellion' in any of the sources cited on that page.
    Perhaps 'skellion' is an informal colloquial spelling. It's difficult to prove, which is half the problem with these templates. In any case, it would hardly be a sufficient foundation on which to base an entire language template. Dgp4004 (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Searching "site:gov.jm skellion" I get just one hit, in lyrics which seem at least part Jamaican Patois. "site:gov.jm scallion" however gets many hits. CMD (talk) 18:42, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This is stated in the Dictionary of Jamaican English cited above. Quotations featuring this spelling in formal writing can be found in articles published by the Jamaican Agricultrual Society in a Google Books search. So long as those journal articles exist and use these spellings, I do not find it justifiable to remove the template as there is no reason a Wikipedia article could not be written in the same register/style of those articles if it cites them. عُثمان (talk) 14:44, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Path

[edit]

With the deletion of {{relative link}} (TFD) & {{relative link implicit}} (TFD), this module no longer serves any purpose as it was exclusively used by those templates. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:33, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

when one visited the Module:Params page, but to display
{{./examples/four cells per row table}}
when one visited the Module:Params/doc page. Now that that template is gone, it is still possible to obtain the same result by directly transcluding the module. The module appears currently unused because whoever removed {{relative link}} from the page did not do a good job at avoiding regressions. In general, we need the functionality offered by this module whenever a transcluded page displays relative paths (so that these appear differently depending on the transcluding page) – for instance, if page a/b/c displays a relative path to a/b/c/d, this should appear as ./d when visiting a/b/c, but should appear as ../c/d when visiting a/b/e. --Grufo (talk) 20:41, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We have already litigate this at 2 seprate TFDs linked to above. This has already been deemed an unhelpful, overly complicated and generally useless template. No reason to keep the module that exclusively was implemented by 2 templates that have been deleted. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:58, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This module does not implement templates. The templates that were removed added a further layer and a functionality to this module: that of creating links. --Grufo (talk) 00:27, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'm sorry but we have magic words that do part or all of what this module does. Gonnym (talk) 12:53, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: Can I ask you how we can obtain this (see above) via magic words?
for instance, if page a/b/c displays a relative path to a/b/c/d, this should appear as ./d when visiting a/b/c, but should appear as ../c/d when visiting a/b/e.
--Grufo (talk) 12:56, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lets start from the end here, I don't think there are many times, or any really, where you'll have a/b/c/d and you'll need something that isn't the first or the end. It's just not how en.wiki works. Now for your question. Please give me a real, current page, that needs this and I'll show you how to get it with magic words. I don't work in hypotheticals. Gonnym (talk) 21:40, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This module was created with concrete use cases in mind, specifically subpages of modules and template (see above). “It's just not how en.wiki works”: I am not sure where you found the manifesto of how enwiki works. My approach is quite pragmatic. If we have—let's say—Module:Params/doc/examples/four cells per row table, the choices are two:
  1. We decide to show always that long path
  2. We use a shorter, more readable, relative path
Wikitext already allows to use relative paths: for instance, if you are in Module:Params/doc/examples you can write [[/four cells per row table]] and you will see /four cells per row table. What wikitext does not allow though (or at least no that easily, as far as I know) is having a transcluded page that links to Module:Params/doc/examples/four cells per row table and shows the correct relative path depending on where it is transcluded (so it must show ./four cells per row table when transcluded in Module:Params/doc/examples, but must show ./examples/four cells per row table when transcluded in Module:Params/doc, and so on—do not pay too much attention to the initial dot for now, this module allows to write it or omit it). If you accept the challenge, that is what I invite you to do via magic words. Careful though, above a certain length that solution might require to be templatized. Moreover, this module is truly a general solution for all these cases, so whatever you find, if you do, might not be as good. --Grufo (talk) 23:32, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure where you found the manifesto of how enwiki works - at some point, after having most of your work be deleted, you should realize that what you are doing is wrong. Gonnym (talk) 08:44, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
“There is no reason for a page like Module:Params/doc/examples/four cells per row table to exist”: How convenient. So you first ask,
“Please give me a real, current page, that needs this and I'll show you how to get it with magic words”
then I reply that you had real examples from the beginning (this discussion is based on those), with the most important one being:
And I ask you to go forward with your implementation. But then you reply that according to you Module:Params/doc/examples/four cells per row table has no reason to exist. The problem is that what you don't like is just one of the many example pages linked by Module:Params/doc that do not need any help from you. If you don't like that target link you can use Module:Params/doc/examples/list of authors for your experiments, or even Module:Params/testcases/tcompare separated entries, or you choose. Nothing will change the fact that your solution will need to be implemented in Module:Params/doc, not in its links. --Grufo (talk) 13:44, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm slowly coming to realize that Module:Params is the source of all this tiring back and forth. At some point, hopefully not too long, it will become orphaned. Gonnym (talk) 17:20, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had no doubts you would come to that conclusion. --Grufo (talk) 17:22, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Purnagiri JS Express Route

[edit]

Unused and no main article for use due to main article not meeting basic GNG requirements. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:38, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: now included in an appropriate article. Useddenim (talk) 21:01, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:38, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Country data Gilgit-Baltistan

[edit]

Country data templates create data for flag templates to draw from, but Gilgit-Baltistan does not have a flag (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flag of Gilgit–Baltistan), so this template serves no purpose. Yue🌙 03:40, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 17:27, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coin image box 2 singles

[edit]

Propose deleting Template:Coin image box 2 singles: redundant to template:multiple image. sapphaline (talk) 09:18, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there are at least 2 other templates to consider in this "series": {{coin image box 1 double}} & {{coin image box 8 singles}} Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:28, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:02, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep @Sapphaline: without going too far down this rabbit hole, it does appear that coin image box styles things a bit differently. Can you demonstrate with an edit diff how one can be replaced by the other? If so I will strike my !vote and switch to delete... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:14, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here. sapphaline (talk) 11:20, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Struck my previous !vote. @Sapphaline: thanks for the diff. Please look at the other related templates I mentioned above. Should those also be merged? -Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:48, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. I will note that the template doesn't have a gap between the images, which looks a lot better when showing the obverse and reverse of a coin. Is there a way to do that with Template:Multiple images? Adding to what Zackmann said the other two templates are even more redundant and I wouldn't mind if we deleted those too. Template:Coin image box 1 double is just a template for showing a single image, and Template:Coin image box 8 singles only seems has one specific use case for euro coins that can easily be accomplished by a table. Eman7blue42 (talk page | recent edits) 20:16, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, until it's clear that {{multiple image}} can replace this template directly. —Locke Cole • t • c • b 16:03, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Locke Cole: I would encourage you to look at the diff linked to above (Special:PermanentLink/1327237049) which shows that the replacement can be easily achieved. As for directly replacing, that is what the holding cell is for... All transclusions will be converted before the template is deleted. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:23, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Zackmann08 Those do not produce the same output to me. I am aware of what the holding cell is for. As @Eman7blue42 notes above, there isn't a gap between the images, and there are other visual differences as well. I also generally despise template deletions as it makes perusing article histories annoying when an invoked template is missing... instead I wish there were a way to mark Templates as deprecated which would effectively forbid saving a page with the template in the wikitext, while allowing prior revisions to be viewed and displayed as intended. Somewhere along the way people got hung up on pruning the Template namespace at all costs... —Locke Cole • t • c • b 06:28, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok well you seem to object to the entire process so not sure how best to engage with you on this one. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:32, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Those do not produce the same output to me" - why do they need to? sapphaline (talk) 10:35, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 6

Template:Baltic Pipeline System-II full

[edit]

Single-use template. Subst onto only article used either in the infobox or elsewhere and delete. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:02, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 30

Template:Transliterate

[edit]

Unused template with no clear use case where you would need to manipulate a string in this fashion. This is particularly true for the case where you would supposedly substitute the template... Just change the characters before you paste the string. This requires so much more work. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 08:06, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. We virtually have no alternative ways to do the same on English Wikipedia. The only other theoretical possibility is Module:MultiReplace, however that is the perfect example of what not to do in order to accomplish what this template has been designed for – for instance, create a {{Unicode italic}} template with the following content:
    {{safesubst:<noinclude />Transliterate
	| 1 = {{{1|}}}
	| 2 = ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
	| 3 = 𝘈𝘉𝘊𝘋𝘌𝘍𝘎𝘏𝘐𝘑𝘒𝘓𝘔𝘕𝘖𝘗𝘘𝘙𝘚𝘛𝘜𝘝𝘞𝘟𝘠𝘡𝘢𝘣𝘤𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘨𝘩𝘪𝘫𝘬𝘭𝘮𝘯𝘰𝘱𝘲𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘷𝘸𝘹𝘺𝘻
}}
    The use case as a substitution template is that of a meta-substitution (i.e. templates for substitution that use this template need to be able to use it as a substitution template). More in general, this template is the way to go when we want two map two different alphabets. --Grufo (talk) 21:59, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - yeah - you could use it, in fact. If you want to transliterate text from, say, Greek to English. But per nom., it is just too much work, and doesn't have any clear benefit over just doing it yourself. That is presumably why it is unused. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:02, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You really don't want to write manually
    {{Abbr|Lorem ipsum|𝘓𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘮 𝘪𝘱𝘴𝘶𝘮 is a lovely sentence}}
    You'd rather write:
    {{Abbr|Lorem ipsum|{{subst:uitalic|Lorem ipsum}} is a lovely sentence}}
    We have no other way to show italicized text or similar things inside the popup message of templates like {{Abbr}}. Italic characters are one example. Then we have monospace characters, then we have bold characters, and then we have—especially in math formulas—fraktur characters, and so on. --Grufo (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Once again Grufo has found a solution to a problem that doesn't exist... Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:23, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand your point of view. I really do. But try to transcend yourself, and think that a person even less skilled than you will tell you one day “We don't need these two apostrophes here you keep using to write italic characters. We don't need to write italic characters. I never needed to write italic characters in a page in my life.” --Grufo (talk) 22:51, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Is there a reason we cannot just use <em>Lorem ipsum</em> etc.? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:27, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yup. It simply won't work. --Grufo (talk) 22:42, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, you mean in the tooltip. Well, okay, what you suggest would work, so I'll strike my delete. Not moving to a keep, though, as no one has seen fit to actually use this for such purposes, and as other solutions exist to insert the unicode in such very limited cases (and as tooltips can't be displayed in main text, it is all a bit meta), I'm unconvinced, but neither is it doing any harm. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 23:13, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There are really many nice use cases for this template, especially in math and languages. For instance, imagine you have the uitalic template above and a template named usup with the following content:
    {{safesubst:<noinclude />Transliterate
	| 1 = {{{1|}}}
	| 2 = ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789+-−=()
	| 3 = ᴬᴮᶜᴰᴱᶠᴳᴴᴵᴶᴷᴸᴹᴺᴼᴾꟴᴿˢᵀᵁⱽᵂˣʸᶻᵃᵇᶜᵈᵉᶠᵍʰⁱʲᵏˡᵐⁿᵒᵖ𐞥ʳˢᵗᵘᵛʷˣʸᶻ⁰¹²³⁴⁵⁶⁷⁸⁹⁺⁻⁻⁼⁽⁾
}}
    Then you will be able to write,
    {{abbr|{{mvar|G}}|{{subst:uitalic|G}} is the gravitational constant, i.e. 6.6743 × 10{{subst:usup|-11}} m{{subst:usup|3}} kg{{subst:usup|-1}} s{{subst:usup|-2}}}}
    which will generate
    G
    Of course we can already do that by hand. But do we really want to do it by hand? Then if we move to languages the use cases will go beyond the {{Abbr}} template (i.e. transliterating alphabets, removing/adding diacritics, and so on). --Grufo (talk) 10:01, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What do you mean by "by hand"? We usually write 6.6743 × 10<sup>-11</sup> m<sup>3</sup> kg<sup>-1</sup> s<sup>-2</sup> to get 6.6743 × 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2. (P.S.: And we could write {{times}} to get  × .) — Chrisahn (talk) 13:09, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Chrisahn: In the specific example in question it is not possible. It will not work. --Grufo (talk) 13:54, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, I got it now. I hadn't understood the main point of your example. {{abbr}} copies the text into the HTML attribute title="...", and HTML tags like <sup> don't work in HTML attributes: {{abbr|Sqm|m<sup>2</sup>}} produces the HTML <abbr title="m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;">Sqm</abbr>, which renders as Sqm, whose mouse hover text is almost as ugly as the attribute content. — Chrisahn (talk) 16:48, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    We're going to need a MOS-compliant example. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Superscripts and subscripts says not to use these characters. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:26, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jonesey95: I totally agree with the MOS, but I also think that the MOS does not go as far as forbidding the only way to express something in specific situations. Also, as explained earlier, this template is not limited to the superscript Unicode characters and the italic Unicode characters shown above. For instance, I am quite persuaded that the MOS has nothing against the fraktur characters used in math, or against other types of transliterations or alphabets. --Grufo (talk) 13:39, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: Here is a MOS-compliant example (it is a substitution template—let's call it {{subst:bfrakt}}):

{{safesubst:<noinclude />Transliterate
	| 1 = {{{1|}}}
	| 2 = ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
	| 3 = 𝕬𝕭𝕮𝕯𝕰𝕱𝕲𝕳𝕴𝕵𝕶𝕷𝕸𝕹𝕺𝕻𝕼𝕽𝕾𝕿𝖀𝖁𝖂𝖃𝖄𝖅𝖆𝖇𝖈𝖉𝖊𝖋𝖌𝖍𝖎𝖏𝖐𝖑𝖒𝖓𝖔𝖕𝖖𝖗𝖘𝖙𝖚𝖛𝖜𝖝𝖞𝖟
}}

This allows writing

Given ideals {{math|{{subst:bfrakt|a}}, {{subst:bfrakt|b}}}} of a commutative ring {{mvar|R}}, the {{mvar|R}}-annihilator of {{math|({{subst:bfrakt|b}} + {{subst:bfrakt|a}})/{{subst:bfrakt|a}}}} is an ideal of {{mvar|R}} called the [[ideal quotient]] of {{math|{{subst:bfrakt|a}}}} by {{math|{{subst:bfrakt|b}}}} and is denoted by {{math|({{subst:bfrakt|a}} : {{subst:bfrakt|b}})}}; it is an instance of [[idealizer]] in commutative algebra.

which generates:

Given ideals 𝖆, 𝖇 of a commutative ring R, the R-annihilator of (𝖇 + 𝖆)/𝖆 is an ideal of R called the ideal quotient of 𝖆 by 𝖇 and is denoted by (𝖆 : 𝖇); it is an instance of idealizer in commutative algebra.

Source: Ideal (ring theory). Of course the same can be done via LaTeX too. But this applies to most use cases of the {{Math}} template. --Grufo (talk) 04:20, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore the redirect. I am unconvinced by the arguments presented by Grufo (and no, I don't need any more). The tooltip examples are clearly a non-starter, and while I could maybe see a use in the \math realm as described, I will note that the actual text from the ring theory example above is about 6 characters shorter per character of rendered text; specifically, \mathfrak{a} is six chars shorter than {{subst:bfrakt|a}} but when including the {{math}} template itself compared to the <math> group it actually jumps up another half-dozen chars. Primefac (talk) 15:06, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Didn't realize this was previous ply a redirect. As the nominator, I fully support this outcome! Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:05, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    “Specifically, \mathfrak{a} is six chars shorter than {{subst:bfrakt|a}}”: The next editor however will thank you, because now {{subst:bfrakt|a}} went away and 𝖆 is 11 chars shorter than \mathfrak{a}. “And no, I don't need any more”: And yet I will give you one more: A {{subst:straight quotes|...}} template to straighten quotation marks in entire paragraphs/sections:
    {{safesubst:<noinclude />Transliterate
	| 1 = {{{1|}}}
	| 2 = “”‘’
	| 3 = ""''
}}
    (Especially useful when we reference sources that use curved quotation marks). I know I can appear overly certain about the utility of this template, but the truth is that I have a lot of experience in using it and I know how much time it can spare in very different situations. --Grufo (talk) 23:25, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    User:GorillaWarfare/script/curlies, much more useful. Gonnym (talk) 13:18, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This is really arguing only for the sake of arguing. Besides the fact that User:GorillaWarfare/script/curlies.js does exactly the same thing, and besides the fact that using scripts has a higher difficulty bar in general, according to what they write that scripts forces you to save the page with curly quotes first, and then straighten them afterwards, whereas here you can simply paste the text with the quotes already straight. --Grufo (talk) 15:30, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Completed discussions

edit

A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at the "Holding Cell".

For an index of all old and archived discussions, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives.

  1. ^ "The Fleet".
  2. ^ "The Naval Service - The Ships".
  3. ^ "P21 L.E. Emer".
  4. ^ "LÉ George Bernard Shaw P64".
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion&oldid=1327315792#Listing_a_template"