Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kelly Martin (talk | contribs) at 17:51, 26 December 2005 (→[]: add bullets). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template loop detected: Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion/Header

Listings

= December 26

Template:Mos4

• Delete: This template contradicts principle 2.2 from the jguk 2 case. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:38, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete along with Mos2-3, and half of its category. Phil Sandifer 17:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:User UT-Austin

Delete: This template is redundant; one serving the same purpose already exists at Template:User_longhorn. -Rebelguys2 09:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Redundant. -Scm83x 09:47, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
Delete Created in error, unaware of existing template. Mea Culpa.1001001 10:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

December 25

Template:Infobox Proprietary Software

Delete: Obsolete by {{Infobox Software}}. - David Björklund (talk) 23:54, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nom --Wikiacc (talk) 02:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Unless someone can provide a way to properly hide the license field of Template:Infobox Software in *all* browsers (including lynx). None of the methods proposed so far do this. The template was introduced to solve a specific problem see Template_talk:Infobox Software. - Motor (talk) 10:32, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Flensburg infobox

Delete unused and redundant with {{Infobox Town DE}} --Sherool (talk) 23:13, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Equatorial Guinea infobox

Delete: This template seems to be a copy of the infobox in article Equatorial Guinea and is apparently not used anywhere. Thuresson 18:11, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete orphaned. --Wikiacc (talk) 02:21, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:PureStates

Delete: "Pure" states? Anyway, not used. dbenbenn | talk 03:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. It looks like this was created for a user page, but the user doesn't have it on his user page anymore, so it can be deleted without affecting anyone or anything. --Metropolitan90 04:19, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and recommend creator to use user page subpages for this purpose in the future. — Phil Welch Katefan's ridiculous poll 18:28, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Per above. -- Jbamb 17:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:User Feminist

Sexist anti-female propaganda by User:D-Day:

User:D-Day decided this, {{User Feminist}}, would be a good addition to Misplaced Pages:Userboxes/Beliefs. The symbol for feminism, as picked by D-Day is "I h8 men" with a link to Feminism.

Somehow, I don't agree: This is nothing but sexist propaganda by D-Day (who I've not talked to before, I just noticed this template addition as the Userboxes project pages are all on my watchlist), designed to convey falsehoods like "all feminists hate men"/"feminists are lesbians", etc --Mistress Selina Kyle 17:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Votes: *Delete --Mistress Selina Kyle 17:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC) (nominator)

• Keep' My apologies if this was offensive. It was created in an attempt to be a lighter tone and I did not mean to offend anyone, nor set any kind of prejudice. I'll change it to try to make it less offensive. --D-Day 17:47, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

• • • Vote cancelled by nominator — Ok, never mind. --Mistress Selina Kyle 18:02, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

December 24

Template:Infobox BridgeSpecificWithMap

Duplicates main Template:Infobox Bridge now that support for the map was made optional. Was only used on four articles, so I moved them to Infobox Bridge. -- Netoholic @ 18:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - Thanks for making the changes to make the parameters optional by the way! ++Lar 20:38, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - Adrian Buehlmann 21:41, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, redundant. - Bobet 14:02, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Police Officer

Seems a tad too specific. Only used on two articles, which are themselves up for deletion. -- Netoholic @ 09:59, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Reluctant delete, yes it does seem too specific, and prone to encourage memorials which are unencyclopediatic. — Eoghanacht 10:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - the idea is not to encourage memorials. It is to pay tribute to those warriors who are living today and those who have left this world. I see that Misplaced Pages is being infiltrated by editors who wish to bring politics into these situations. A few rogue Vandalizers should not be able to wield power in such a negative way.CelebritySecurity 18:11, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Misplaced Pages is not the place for memorials. --JiFish(/_Contrib) 18:16, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
    • It is not a memorial. It part of an ongoing effort to encourage information about living and deceased warriors. http://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Canadian_law_enforcement_officers Please respect the hard work of others and the political implications of your actions. Reminder: This is "free" encyclopedia. The overhwleming effort by certain individuals/admins here on wikipedia to both vandalize and eliminate those parts of the encyclopedia that include a broader focus on law enforcement issues is alarming and should be of concern to those who believe in freedom of information. CelebritySecurity 18:26, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
      • WP:NOT a soapbox, either. android79 18:28, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. "Prone to encourage" memorials can be said about ANY of the biographical infoboxes here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CelebritySecurity (talk • contribs)
  • That's not right; that's not even wrong. --Calton | Talk 01:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Weak Delete per nomination. --JiFish(/_Contrib) 00:50, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per "Only used on two articles, which are themselves up for deletion". Adrian Buehlmann 21:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• ...the idea is not to encourage memorials. It is to pay tribute... Guy, you contradict yourself almost immediately. Misplaced Pages is not a memorial, nor a soapbox. Delete. --Calton | Talk 01:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete overly specific. --Wikiacc (talk) 02:15, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. DES 02:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Early Muslim conflicts

Listing for Zora. gren グレン 05:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as it stands this template really gets in the way. If it's kept, which I think right now is a bad idea, it should be made much smaller and so it is put at the bottom of articles. We have battle boxes which are supposed to go where Striver has put it. gren グレン 05:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• i also agree that it should be deleted. at the very least, someone needs to edit it, as it has numerous grammar and spelling errors (why are there no apostrophes?!). but moreover, i'm just not sure how the template really adds anything. Dgl 11:07, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. I don't really know much about the topic, but if it makes sense to group them together, I don't see why not have it. Further, the complaint about the apostrophes is trivial, I have just fixed that. –Andyluciano 19:04, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment The "them" that are being grouped are highly heterogeneous. They aren't all "conflicts", for one thing. The Hijra was not a conflict. Succession to Muhammad was a political struggle, but not a battle. Treaties aren't conflicts! The timeline is also undefined. After complaining to the creator of the template, who is a Shi'a Muslim, that ending the template with the Battle of Karbala was POV, he added one other revolt. But why stop there? Why not everything that happened during the Umayyad caliphate? Also, even with the punctuation problems fixed, there are still red links, mispellings, etc. We have one editor weighing in here, Dgl, who has a master's degree in Islamic studies. He wrote the article on the Battle of al-Qādisiyyah. If he thinks this template is useless, it's useless. We already have extensive interlinking between Islamic history articles, plus an article on Islamic history, plus a timeline of Islamic history. That's enough to orient readers. Zora 20:28, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Very well, I stand corrected. I made my post because no one explained why it ought to be deleted, and now you have done that. Thanks. –Andyluciano 08:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
      • Thanks for your openmindedness and willingness to listen. Zora 09:24, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. If all that is needed is a chronological list of battles, the proper way to do it is via a campaignbox template. —Kirill Lokshin 21:27, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

December 23

Template:Literarypunkgenre

Delete: Seeing as most of the articles that this template links together are listed at AfD, I thought it should join them. I suspect its creator wants it gone, as he recently blanked the page. - EurekaLott 23:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Delete Salt the Earth --J13 23:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Avogadro94 01:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Signed

Delete: Considering that we already have the "unsigned" template, I don't think we need a "signed" one. HappyCamper 23:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. If it's signed, why would we have to...? This template confuses me.--Sean|Black 23:51, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• BJAODN? Pointless template, most decidedly a bad idea because of ~~~~. The only uses I've seen are an anon just wanting to sign as User:anon. At the very least delete. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:03, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Image-license

• Delete: Created to standardize image templates and leave room for the EXIF Metatable (in its old location). Now that the metatable has moved and some uses have been reverted, it's time for this to go. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Please see below for a short but important note regarding the nomination.
• Delete: seems to have relatively little usage? I added {{tfd-inline|Image-license}} to it to alert folks. ++Lar 16:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • The reason there was no TfD notice on the template was to prevent any problems with how it is used with subst. (I put it on the talk page instead). I do not object to its appearance, however. (The subst part just gives the impression it is not used, but of all of our licensing templates it still hasn't enjoyed widespread use.) --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Ah. Well the subst usages aren't going to be affected by it going away, they already are subst'd in, right? The actual transcludes of it seem very rare unless I was misinterpreting "what links here"... But please feel free to revert me if you like! ++Lar 21:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
      • I checked the whatlinkshere... no transclusion that I can tell. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Somebody should have checked the talk page. It's a work in progress to standardize all image license, primarily to make license information machine-readable. Any help with that work is appreciated. Zocky 18:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Zocky ++Lar 04:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Er, never mind then. Abstain and withdraw nomination. (Although the spacing for the EXIF Metatable can go...) --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:if

Delete: Not used. – Adrian | Talk 09:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, it is an API to be used in other templates. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 09:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It has been deprecated and is defunct. See also Template talk:if. – Adrian | Talk 09:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Good to know. Changing my vote to to Del ←Humus sapiens←ну? 09:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete now it's no longer required. —Phil | Talk 10:12, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete my bot didnt touch 15,000 articles for nothing. Martin 10:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Weak redirect to {{qif}} Delete and rename {{qif}} to {{if}}. Once we've got rid of the old template, the new and improved one should be given the obvious name. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 12:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, of course. More to come soon. -- Netoholic @ 14:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I never want to see this thing again. —Lifeisunfair 14:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete this and related templates; the trouble and confusion they cause more than offsets the value they add. Radiant_>|< 18:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and rename {{qif}} to {{if}}, per Ilmari Karonen. Shawnc 22:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• I would propose not to do a redirect. qif is at the moment an extreme high use template: What links here lists 31'000+ articles. A redirect means an additional database lookup, which should be avoided. At least, if there is a real need to have qif under the name if, please copy the contents of qif to if. Do not create a redirect. Disclaimer: Beware of WP:AUM. Adrian Buehlmann 12:41, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
  • My intent was to imply that, if a rename is done, another bot run should be performed to change all instances of {{qif}} (back) to {{if}}. But the naming issue is actually rather minor, and it may not actually be worth doing anything about until this entire logic template controversy is settled. Hopefully we'll eventually get new MediaWiki syntax that will obsolete all these templates, preferably sooner that later. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 14:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Jtkiefer ---- 08:16, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• I'd prefer protecting it as a blank template, so editors can have access to its edit history. Keep the talk page so that people who're interested would be able to know what'd been happening. — Instantnood 20:33, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, meta-template, unused and deprecated in favor of {{qif}}. --Wikiacc (talk) 02:23, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Blank and protect per Instantnood... ++Lar 14:42, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:HKCrownCopyright

in zh wp deleted. seezh:Misplaced Pages:删除投票和请求/2005年12月15日 and --Shizhao 01:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Keep for now - Original discussion can be found in Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Hong Kong. The deletion was not properly conducted in the Chinese Misplaced Pages, as the participants have misinterpreted "District Council" (a government statutory body) as "British Council" (a quasi-official, non-Hong Kong organization) who corresponded with PZFUN. Until the status of the template has been properly discussed, I would go for keeping this template for now. Carlsmith 11:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep per Carlsmith. (Btw there are 18 district councils, and therefore statutory bodies.) — Instantnood 20:29, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Middle-earth portal

Delete:"Easter egg" style link to Portal:Middle-earth. This is bad in terms of navigation, as the reader has no idea what the link is, and to further complicate things, they'd likely assume that the image links there too. I don't think that a link to Portal:Middle-earth needs a template. On some pages, this template can cause appearance issues as it clutters up the space, especially those with some templates and images already. See for example The Lord of the Rings (1978 film), The Lord of the Rings film trilogy, Category:Middle-earth. This kind of link would be more appropriate in text form under "See also" headings, however not on all ~80 pages it currently exists on. --Qirex 01:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Note: I moved the portal down on The Lord of the Rings (1978 film) - this link shows where it was when Qirex commented above on it causing appearance issues. --CBD _☎ 01:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Further note: the picture link has been fixed, thanks to Locke Cole, and I just added Middle Earth Portal to the caption. --Go for it! 04:38, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Nomination withdrawn because, as CBD pointed out, this is "a discussion for Misplaced Pages talk:Portal to determine if the way all portals are linked". I'm sorry that I didn't better research the whole portals thing and save everyone the bother. Thank you Locke Cole and Go for it! for making improvements to the template.

Question: should I go ahead and remove the tfd tag and place tfd-kept to the template talk page or is that something only an admin does? --Qirex 15:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe an admin may close it early if you, as the nominator, have withdrawn your nomination (which you've done). Especially since the voting is leaning heavily towards keep. —Locke Cole 15:53, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

The page may be speedily kept if the nominator withdraws his nomination and there are no "delete" votes. Or if someone wants to flex their WP:IAR muscles. Ξxtreme Unction|_{yakkity yak} 16:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

As of this writing there appears to be one "delete" vote, perhaps that voter could be persuaded to change his vote? (IIRC, he has been tagged as an inclusionist in some circles... smile)++Lar 00:18, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

'Fraid not. I really dislike portal templates. Phil Sandifer 00:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Why? You didn't explain your vote before. Is it something that can be fixed? --CBD _☎ 01:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - Obviously as the creator I'm biased. That said, at most I'd think the template should be changed if consensus finds that it's purpose is confusing. Some of the issues listed above are actually standard practice for portals. For instance, it is standard to link articles related to a portal to that portal and put the portal links at the top of the page - see for instance Template:Philosophy portal and Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Philosophy portal. Where images at the top of the page conflict the portal link can be moved down, as it always was for The Lord of the Rings, Middle-earth, History of Arda, and various others. The 'easter egg' was intended to be self evident to anyone familiar with the topic and follow the general concept of making portals 'personalized' to the topics they cover, but if there is concern about that the text can easily be replaced with a generic 'Middle-earth portal' message. --CBD _☎ 01:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment - Undecided at the moment, but I'd like to add that I had no idea what it was when I first saw it. My first impulse was to delete it from the page because I took it for an irrelevant image (on The Hobbit, where the door of Moria isn't germaine to the subject) and didn't notice what it was until I was editing the page. It doesn't communicate its purpose very well even to one intimately familiar with the subject. But really, I think Misplaced Pages features should be aimed at the general reader. I'd vote to delete it in its present form, but with appropriate changes I'd vote to keep it. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - Recent changes are improvements, but could a different image be found? The current one is barely recognizable, and unless you already know what it's supposed to be it doesn't look in the least like a door. Not at my screen resolution anyway. (1024x768 on a 19" CRT. Didn't look good on the flat panel I use at work either.) TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

    Really? It looked pretty good on my screens, but I tend to use higher resolution (1280 x 1024). I'll check it under different settings and see if it can be cleaned up. --CBD _☎ 12:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep: I'm glad I spotted this one. It's creative. An element that is often stifled in encyclopedias. But this is Misplaced Pages, which encourages creativity and novel approaches to encyclopedia design. Though a portal link such as this should mention the portal. Simply add the link "Middle-earth portal" in a sentence immediately following the fabled line from the book. So that takes care of the easter egg issue. As for the picture, is there any way to make a picture part of a link? I'd really like to know. If not, perhaps it can be iconized. But this doesn't matter, since the picture is definitely on-theme, and if its text includes "Middle-earth portal", the user will know that's a clickable link. But the picture is a bit dark, and itself needs to be freshened up, but that's easy to fix. I agree that the template clashes on some pages, but it is a nice touch on those with nothing to clash with. And the statement about "this kind of link would be more appropriate in text form under "See also" headings" argues against portal link templates in general, but they are in common use throughout Misplaced Pages, so this is not the place to be pushing such an agenda, as it pertains to general policy. Portal link templates are a Misplaced Pages tradition, and are a means to centralize portals, which helps portals be precisely what they are supposed to be: centralized. Therefore, this deletion nomination should never have been posted. Instead, an effort should have been made to fix the template and adjust its placement. I don't see any evidence of such an effort on Qirex's part. Just a knee-jerk "let's kill it" response. Besides, this portal link accents the Middle-earth theme quite well, and using a picture of a portal to represent a Misplaced Pages portal is brilliant. This one's a keeper. Go for it! 02:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I think to characterise this nomination as "a knee-jerk "let's kill it" response" is a misrepresentation. I came across template when I noticed some placement issues of {{bakshi}}, and went to ~10 pages to see if I could resolve the problem (see the second and third pages of my contribs). I am a firm believer in fixing problems where they exist. I nominated this template because I honestly do not see the need to place large and prominent links to portals mixed in with the main body of text, and if the template is to go at the bottom of the page anyway, then it may as well be represented with plain text under an internal links section; simpler is better. --Qirex 08:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

    Qirex, I can see your viewpoint, but the problem is that it runs contrary to virtually EVERY portal on Misplaced Pages. I didn't come up with the idea of putting portal links with images at the top of related articles... I just followed the standard set by earlier portals in doing so. Most of them use the generic portal link template, but it's still an image box. I haven't found a single WikiPortal which follows the 'text link in 'See also' section' standard you propose. This is therefore really a discussion for Misplaced Pages talk:Portal to determine if the way all portals are linked should be changed. --CBD _☎ 12:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. I'd like to vote 'delete' but alas, I cannot. I wouldnt read them books if I was tortured, but I understand that some people adore poor prose – so for their sake I vote this way.--Ezeu 02:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Phil Sandifer 02:42, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, I've fixed it so if the image is clicked on, it also takes you to the Portal (and not to the Image info). —Locke Cole 02:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I think it's pretty cool. I know that's not exactly the strongest argument on Misplaced Pages, but there you have it. Kafziel 03:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Quite a good argument if whosoever admin agrees with you. --Ezeu 04:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Some of noms issues have been resolved, and others can be fixed by where its placed on the page. And, if for some reason it really doesnt work on a page, just dont use the graphic version, it's all optional anyway. --Stbalbach 05:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - It can be very easily improved (and certainly will be) into a worthwhile portal link. In addition to changing the text and sharpening up or replacing the image, I would propose moving the text to the side as with the Philosophy portal, which I think is more attractive and less intrusive on the page. AGGoH 09:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

December 22

Template:NYC Hudson River crossings

Delete: A template covering the entire Hudson River, Template:Hudson River crossings, has been created (and already used north of the city line), and I think it would be good to put that all along the Hudson River. Having both would make them a bit cluttered, not to mention the fact that all really within the City have Template:NY-bt. I have already put notices on all of the talk pages for these articles, and noone has strongly objected. I suggest that first Template:Hudson River crossings be used all along, and then, pending the result of this TFD, all instances of Template:NYC Hudson River crossings be removed and it be deleted. Redirection would not work, since the newer one uses north and south parameters. Chris 16:31, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: per nom. It should be noted that user Cacophony, active in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Bridges, thinks that the other, newer one: Template:Hudson River crossings, is the one to delete. However I feel that all 3 are not needed in one article (see, for example Lincoln Tunnel for an example of the clutter having all three gives), and that Template:NY-bt makes Template:NYC Hudson River crossings redundant, while Template:NYC Hudson River crossings does not extend far enough upriver to handle, for example, Kingston-Rhinecliff Bridge, nor should it, and Template:Hudson River crossings does. ++Lar 17:01, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Redundant. Kafziel 03:30, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:ReligionScotland

I liked this template at first look, as a navigation around Scots religions. But, it isn't. There are no Scotland specific articles on the non-Christian faiths listed and the links just go to the general article. So, this is not a navigation aid, but just a very incomplete list of religions in Scotland. If we completed it, it would be unmanagable as a template. A link from the articles this template is on to the article Religion in Scotland would achieve everything this template does without POV decisions as to what to include. Delete (recreate if Scotland specific articles on the major faiths appear later) --Doc 10:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep: At least seven of those article links are to specific Scottish churches. If anything the fact that the non-christian links are not specific simply means they need articles created at some point. It's got a strong Christian bias for the Scotland-specific articles, but that bias reflects religion in Scotland too. Thanks/wangi 10:07, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

But tell me what use it is? Why is this preferable to a category? I agree that non-Christian Scottish articles would be desirable, but there are none as of now. Why is it useful to be able to navigate from the Church of Scotland article, to a general article on Budhism - with no explanation as to its significance to Scotland? I've no objections to this being recreated as a 'Christian denominations in Scotland' template - and then perhaps later recreated as 'Religion in Scotland' when we have articles on various faiths. But as it stands now tis template has no utility and is just plain clutter. --Doc 10:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. A template may be useful in the future, but I think a category would be better until such a time as there are specific articles on non-Christian religions in Scotland. --GraemeL 13:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I have just found Category:Religion in Scotland - I think it suffices for now. --Doc 13:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Don't see any reason to delete an OK template. FearÉIREANN\ 18:38, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: Ashibaka edited the template to remove the non-specific religions. I've then fixed up the display and corrected the tfd link (it wasn't added correctly and didn't have a proper link to this discussion). Thanks/wangi 12:55, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep: I Davidkinnen created this template to facilitate the growth of Religion in Scotland. It is rather sad that rather than time being spent on creating Scotland specific articles we are proposing to delete a template about Religion in Scotland. Davidkinnen 17:01, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

December 21

Template:Irish Republicanism

Delete: Impossible topic to be actively NPOV with and guaranteed to produce endless edit wars over who is a real republican party and who isn't (Republican Sinn Féiners and Sinn Féiners will fight about each others' true republicanism for a start, while Fine Gael, a pro-Commonwealth party in the 1940s, actually declared the Republic of Ireland some would argue should be in on that basis), what linear links join what organisation (were the Officials marxist or republican), whose analysis is valid/invalid/biased, etc. Also inaccurate in many places - Griffith was a monarchist. Connolly wanted a socialist republic not a nationalist republic. Why is Bobby Sands in but Sean MacBride out in the list of "key figures"? How key is Sands anyway? What about Sean MacStiofáin? Cathal Goulding? Sean Lemass? The topic is far too complicated and already provokes too many edit wars across a range of articles without adding a template full of questionable presumptions and definitions, most of them POV, into the mix. This is one template due an early trip to the wiki-bin.

• delete FearÉIREANN\ 22:58, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. POV magnet, topic is too broad for a template of this type.--Sean|Black 01:38, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. May provoke edit wars, but we can manage with things like fasicsm... -- Jbamb 23:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• keep: if you want Sean MacStiofain add him, when I made it I made it clear it was just the skeleton of a template and that it should be added to, I didn't want it as my creation, the many pages that relate to Irish Republicanism have no coherent order at all, this Template could go some way to bringing a bit of order. Communism has a Template, with POV issues all the time, why not delete that too eh? How about the Anarchism one, that's a really broad topic too, send it to the wiki-bin? Escobar600ie 15:42, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Wildly POV part of the provo claim to be the true faith descendents of the War of Independence. --Red King 18:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Lapsed Pacifist 18:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - POV.--File Éireann 19:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep but change. It makes sense to have a template for Irish Republican organisations. Other political ideologies have one, so why not Irish republicanism? However, it should definitely be removed from articles on the war of independence, civil war, the troubles and other historical events. These have a much wider importance in Irish history than merely the activities of one strain of Irish political thought. If no one objects, I'm going to do this. Also, the content of the template needs to be changed. Earlier organisations like the United Irishmen should go in for example, so should Clann na Phoblachta, the Republican Congress etc. Also, the list of people should be removed, because it will be impossible for people who agree on who goes in. Jdorney 19:35, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete I had some misgivings of this when it appeared first. As pointed out previously I could see this turning into a pov quagmire of who is the one, true faith. Djegan 19:38, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Neutral for now. The idea that this could become a quagmire isn't the most compelling reason to delete. I also take issue with some of the alleged inaccuracies. Griffith started out as a monarchist, but can you really argue that when he took his seat in Dail Eireann he was still one then? Likewise whether Connolly was a socalist republican or a nationalist one, he was still a republican. But I do see issues arising as to who gets into the template. Why not Tom Clarke or John Devoy? It could certainly be problematical, but I'm not entirely convinced it doesn't deserve a chance. -R. fiend 20:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Considering the pov-warriors and clear out lunatics we get editing the articles under this template to serve their own POV, or in some cases, completely fantastical alternate histories, there isn't a chance in hell that such a template could be NPOV, ever. --Kiand 20:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Any non-POV version of this template would have to be so broadly inclusive as to be meaningless. --Ryano 20:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Hideous, doesn't add anything. -- Daily 22: 38, 23 December 2005

Some User templates

To remove

Template:User 2.05, Template:User es 1337, Template:User ca 1337, Template:User_ast_1337

• Delete — Strange templates _→AzaToth 20:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. All four seem like abandoned tests. Owen× ☎ 21:21, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete all four not used, first looks like a test, the others look like somone was trying to reserve userbox fictious languages' foreign language equivs. xaosflux /_CVU 08:10, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete violet/riga (t) 10:24, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Userfy

Template:User Tony Sidaway/User Template:User:shreshth91/welcome-2 Template:User:shreshth91/welcome Template:User:APclark/Babel Template:User:Alex Nisnevich/sidebar Template:User:Alex Nisnevich/sig Template:User:Autoit script Template:User:Carnildo/Nospam Template:User:Cool Cat/Imposter Template:User:DaGizza/Sg Template:User:DaGizza/Welcome for Cricket Template:User:DaGizza/Welcome for Rugby Template:User:Encyclopedist/Usercomment Template:User:Encyclopedist/Welcome! Template:User:Gator1/dbtemplate Template:User:Ianbrown/Templates/away Template:User:SWD316/sidebar Template:User:Shreshth91/welcome Template:User:SimonMayer/Nav Box Template:User:Super-Magician/Main Template:User:Super-Magician/Sandbox Template:User:Super-Magician/Signature Template:User:Super-Magician/Signature/Time Template:User:Super-Magician/Signature nosign Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/AST Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/CDT Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/CST Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/EDT Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/EST Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatusNone Template:User:Super-Magician/Wikistress3D/Left Template:User:Super-Magician/Wikistress3D/Right Template:User:TShilo12/Welcome Template:User:V.Molotov/Welcome! Template:User:cacumer/linkbox Template:User/Manjith Template:User-alfakim-signature

• Userfy — clearly missplaced user templates _→AzaToth 20:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• • Keep these. Not sure if it's still true, but at the time I created my user templates there were serious operational problems with templates created outside template space. These templates are all clearly identified and do no harm. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 21:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Harmless where they are, and used by their respective authors. Owen× ☎ 21:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• • • Comment As far as i know, templates outside tempalte space now work just fine -- i have tested several in my user space before moving them to template space, and I have a couple for personal use that stay in my user space. But i don't know what the problems were before, so i can't be sure that they are gone. DES 21:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Templates in userspace work fine these days, so I would prefer if the various users mentioned here moved these templates to their userspace. But I see little point in deleting them. Radiant_>|< 22:21, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy keep. Pointless and frankly absurd nomination. It is this sort of nonsense that gives this page and the whole deletion process a bad name. FearÉIREANN\ 23:00, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfy if it works in user space now, that's where it belongs. -- Jbamb 23:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• I don't think a userfy would hurt, but don't delete them. Titoxd 02:56, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfying sounds reasonable. There's no need for them to be in the template space. — Knowledge Seeker দ 03:32, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfy. Single user templates like these in the Template namespace aught to have a speedy-move criteria. 04:01, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
  • There is no policy against moving anything belonging to a user, or only used by that user, into that user's userspace (but it would be nice to ask the user first). Userfy, no problems with speedying. Radiant_>|< 12:53, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfy - obvious course of action. Thanks for finding all these AzaToth, sorry to see your hard work called "pointless" and "absurd". violet/riga (t) 10:24, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfy. Those silly kids need to stop emptying their sand-filled boots on Jimbo's the cabal's our floor. Cernen 11:36, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Hebrewterm

Makes a pretty cluttery little box that gives the translation of a Hebrew term. This causes a colossal mess on pages already overloaded with boxes and navigational aids, and the translation of a word can easily be mentioned in the text without any further need for boxes. JFW | T@lk 19:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. JFW | T@lk 19:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Per nominator.Template has changed to have the box removed --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 19:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete--Amir E. Aharoni 20:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC) (a little history: my first vote :) )
  • Comment: A proper etymology template is what Misplaced Pages needs. I'm really sorry to disappoint Humus sapiens.--Amir E. Aharoni 07:19, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Humus sapiens convinced me. This is a 💕 and i exercise my right to change my mind. The way it looks now at Yerida is OK. Some structure is better than no structure at all. I still think that there's a need for a proper etymology template, though.--Amir E. Aharoni 09:41, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Let's discuss first: this is a day-old template, still in development. The possibilities are to add pronunciation/sound link, etc. or it may be made a single-line template. Now it is similar to Template:Arabicterm, Template:Russianterm. Remove or move it around in the articles where you think it adds clutter. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 20:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete; I really don't see why we can't include a Hebrew word, its transliteration or translation in a text if it's needed, without using a box. EldKatt (Talk) 20:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: it doesn't necessarily have to be a box, another option is to make it in-text. The idea was to introduce consistency, please see Template talk:Hebrewterm. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 23:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Consistency in formatting is great, but I think more flexibility is needed than this template can provide. You don't always need a translation of a term, for example (if the meaning is implied by the context or explained elsewhere), and in such and similar cases it's undesirable to rely on this template for consistency of style. A guideline of some kind would be more flexible and useful. EldKatt (Talk) 11:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Upon seeing it used at Yerida, I suddenly understand its point. I previously assumed that it were supposed to be used in articles wherever a Hebrew word is used, which I do think is not a good idea. But keep, for use in the head of articles such as Yerida. EldKatt (Talk) 11:21, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep: I agree that as it is, it is an annoyance. If we could use it for making inline use of foriegn terms more consistent, then great! But see my comments on Template Talk. I'm willing to change my vote if this becomes feasible or surely unfeasible. jnothman 23:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - Completely rewritten to be in-text with optional params: plural and audio for now. Please reconsider/comment/improve rather than delete. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 03:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This looks very useful. SlimVirgin 05:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Change - As it is I can see little need for it - there is no appreciable saving of keystrokes, all it add is consistency (good but not worth the candle). If this was formatted up like the Template:Arabicterm then there are far more possiblities. Then I would vote keep but not as it is! Kevinalewis 11:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Actually it was created as a box, but the consensus seems to have it in-text. Could you tell us what are "far more possiblities", perhaps they can be accomodated in this or another template. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 11:42, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep it as a text version as with {{hebrewterm|ירידה|yerida|descent}} in Yerida. But hey, what is this going to do to all of User:Gilgamesh's "Tiberian Hebrew" extras in so many of the Hebrew worded articles? Hmmm, where is he? I think I'll ask him to come over and give his POV. IZAK 08:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Oy! If needed, we can add more optional params. I am learning the syntax, so any help is appreciated. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 08:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Please do not condescend... Tiberian vocalization is the original standard of the Masoretic Text. Even if it has little modern Ashkenazi Orthodox Jewish religious significance, it's linguistic significance is incalculable. If you differentiate the differences between the different modern liturgical Hebrew practices (Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Romaniote, Iraqi, Yemenite, etc.), you get 99% of the same linguistic detail laid out in Tiberian and elegantly described with Tiberian vowel points. But that's besides the point of this vote... - Gilgamesh 18:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per EldKatt (Talk) 11:21, 22 December 2005 (UTC)—msh210 17:31, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and Expand to include niqqud, Tiberian (Masoretic) vocalization and Standard Hebrew (Eliezer ben Yehuda) transcription (e.g. those official Israeli government spellings that few outside the CBS uses, but are still of value to linguists). Such things can be left blank until someone knowledgeable of them can fill them in. - Gilgamesh 18:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment Though this template is useful sometimes, other times it has its shortcomings. For instance, a topic may have linguistic information in addition to Hebrew and Jewish practice. For instance, many Old Testament figures are also prominent in Islam and have Arabic names, e.g. Jalut for Goliath and Hajar for Hagar. Additionally, even some Hebrew words, such as "rabbi," have even niqqud-level differences based on tradition, e.g. "ribbi" in most non-Ashkenazi historical texts, but "rabbi" in Ashkenazi and (because of the Ashkenazi elite in Israeli society) Israeli Hebrew. - Gilgamesh 18:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Db-crystalball

Used for speedy deletion on grounds that "Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball". But that is not in fact a criterion for speedy deletion. Radiant_>|< 15:12, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Owen× ☎ 15:16, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Crush by elephant (delete) Templates giving speedy delete reasons not supported by WP:CSD] are very pernicious. Indeed perhaps they should be speedy deleted? (Grin). DES 17:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Also, {{Crystalball}} which is a redirect to this template should be deleted for the same reasons. DES 17:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, to avoid CSD-creep. Titoxd 21:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Squishy squishy. -- Jbamb 23:52, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not a CSD reasoning (these are all cases for AfD). BTW, the {{Crystalball}} redirect was created by a move for consistency reasons by me, {{Crystalball}} was the original name of the template. Just wanted to note this. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: not all "crystal ball" articles are even good AfD candidates, never mind CSD, despite the rabid imaginings of some. Phil | Talk 10:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete to discourage speedy deletes out of process. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 14:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, just because Misplaced Pages is the only place where people can openly contradict their actions and not get stuff thrown at them. Also, it's bad for the environment. Cernen 10:49, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Stars

Adds an extra three levels of metatemplate cruft to album infoboxes, solely to add alt text to an image (which is already there in many cases, sometimes in superior form). If the alt text is that important, it can be added by a bot. —Cryptic (talk) 06:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. I'm all for getting the proper alt-text but this is not the way (bot?). Using the switch and the template is a needless waste of resources. This template is not likely to change... we are not likely going to get new stars (if we did we'd just change the image anyways) so I see no use to this template. gren グレン 06:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Very strong KEEP!. I've seen this start to be flowed onto Album infoboxes. All it is, is an easier way to flow ratings from AllMusic.com and elsewhere into the infobox. Never throw oout something useful, it would be like replacing the hatch on a submarine with a screen door, or replacing the healthy food in your fridge with junk food. --Cjmarsicano 06:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It doesn't actually make it easier; it just makes people have to learn a new syntax. Here's what happens when someone tries to figure it out by trial and error. Alt text is useful. Crippling the servers is not. (And for the user who helpfully moved the tfd notice from the talk page, note that the template has been placed into some 1600 articles (almost all of them by User:ScudLee), all of whose caches you just broke.) —Cryptic (talk) 06:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Not a problem, glad to help make sure this TfD receives a fair "trial". Next time, please don't try to hide the fact that you're nominating a template for deletion by placing the notice only on the talk page. —Locke Cole 08:45, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
      • Nobody was trying to hide anything; thanks for your assumption of good faith. Its far-and-away most-frequent user is presumeably watching the talk page (since he created it), and it was noted on Template talk:Album infobox, which will be watched by anyone at all likely to use it. The notice was placed on the talk page because editing a template used on as many pages as this one is will fully occupy the servers for about ten seconds (see WP:AUM). —Cryptic (talk) 09:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
        • I was just returning the favor for your assumption of good faith on my part. My concern isn't with server load, it's with ensuring this TfD nomination has a chance to be heard fairly. I'm aware of WP:AUM, I'm also aware that many people don't keep frequently used templates on their watchlist. It makes sense that these people should be notified. —Locke Cole 09:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Strong delete, please spare our servers the torture, and help fix it instead. Titoxd 06:54, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Abstain for now. In terms of usability, it seems much easier to me, especially the way you type for a half star: {{stars|2.5}} instead of ], which always felt very unintuitive. Very few people bother with typing alternate text, because editing gets done by imitation (for the most part) and no-one else is doing it. Imitation isn't that hard to master, so I'm not very moved by the argument that it is a burden to learn a handful of characters worth of syntax. I'm equally unmoved by the fact that "almost all of them by User:ScudLee" – he attempted to discuss the idea at Project albums talk page, no one objected or even responded really, and no-one else really bothered about the work as much as he did. However, if there is an extra burdon on servers then that's not good, but I can't really comment on that aspect because I wouldn't know what I'm talking about. Could we use subst: to get around this problem? Having read the talk page for the template, it's quite clear that subst will be much worse than just typing out ] --Qirex 08:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • By the way, shouldn't the TFD notice go on the template talk page so as not to screw up all those infoboxes?? See for example To the Extreme --Qirex 08:13, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
    • The only way some people will even know this template is up for deletion is if the notice is on the template itself (not the talk page). I moved it from the talk page so it would, hopefully, get a fair shake here at TfD.. (otherwise, it's possible it would get deleted without a proper debate). Yes it makes it ugly, but plenty of other templates face TfD and deal with the ugly factor; it's an effective means of informing editors that a template they might use is being considered for deletion. (Now if only IfD had a way of superimposing a notice over an image when it's up for deletion...) —Locke Cole 08:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Strong keep. The template is one of the best ideas that I've seen in a while, and yet you're considering it for deletion? --Andylkl 08:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It's a good idea to put horrible strain on the servers?--Sean|Black 08:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Switching to abstain for the time being then. --Andylkl 09:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not useful enough to justify the expense.--Sean|Black 08:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. (Creator). There is a secondary purpose to this template which I neglected to mention when I created it. My intention from the start was to replace the existing stars with images of my own. These images have a transparent interior, allowing the actual color of the stars to be decided by the background of a surrounding span tag. This is only really feasible if it is handled within a template. Because they have a different appearance to the current stars, I was going to do the switchover once I'd replaced all usages, to maintain consistency, that, perhaps, was a mistake. - Lee (talk) 10:16, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oh, and I'd also add that the first switch template will be eliminated by the new images, since their file names match the parameter. The second switch template can be removed by a simple rewording. - Lee (talk) 10:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I've uploaded Image:Transparent3.5of5.png as an example, and posted the potential Switch-less code on Template talk:Stars. - Lee (talk) 12:45, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete it's not just the template, but because it only works on 5 stars. If it were to work for 3/4 or 8/10 it would be a std approach to handling ratings. KittenKlub 10:21, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Largely on the strength of the strain on the servers, this becomes "Expense" which should be avoided, except for Real benefit. Tha's not quite the right way to put it, functionally this is a really good idea, but so is KittenKlub's (see last post). Personally the I believe the whole thing should be rethought and the issue of star ratings of different number base's included in the reworking. Ratings out of 10 are very common and should be allowed for, please come up with a more comprehensive solution (i.e. various start ratings) but with minimal server impact. Kevinalewis 10:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

  It would be fairly trivial to introduce a second parameter to handle the total number of stars without breaking current usage (it can default to 5). It would mean drawing even more images to handle all the cases, but other than that, that doesn't present a problem. - Lee (talk) 11:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

  If you can do all that and remove the need for the metatemplate you would provide the holy grain of star rating templates! Kevinalewis 11:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete It's easy enough to learn new syntax if it's for the good as far as the servers go. I'm a new user but would be happy to copy others' use of the new (or old) syntax. Crazyale 12:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep.—thegreentrilby 14:13, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Keep This info box is truely a good way to link to AMG, a standard music service. Makenji-san 14:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Um. Nobody's saying we should delete {{Album infobox}}. Or even get rid of the reviews section. Or even the images of stars. Just the template that, very inefficiently, puts the images there. —Cryptic (talk) 15:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as above, and per WP:AUM. Radiant_>|< 15:12, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator. --NormanEinstein 15:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Weak keep. Creator is working on a Switch-less version, and {{switch}} is in any case one of the lighter-weight If Templates. I just can't see this as the straw that would break the camel's back. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Notice: I have now eliminated the {{switch}} templates. This template no longer includes any other templates. Please consider revising your comments above to reflect the new situation. I have also remove the TfD notice from the template itself to minimize server load (can {{tfd}} be substed?). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:04, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - this is a change of vote - although not moving beyond the 5 star basis, this is now NOT a metatemplate. So arguements on that basis have lost all relevance to this template. Purhaps someone will generate the other base star ratings in time. Thanks—Ilmari Karonen - Kevinalewis 09:45, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Question: isn't it still effectively a metatemplate since it gets placed inside a template? Or, is it not a metatemplate now because it doesn't, itself, contain a template? --Qirex 01:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It was never a meta-template, as described at WP:AUM (although it used to contain a couple). Meta-templates are templates used within another template, whilst Stars is used directly in articles. The fact that it's usually passed as a parameter in {{Album infobox}} is (AFAIK) neither here nor there. Edits to Stars don't, for example, automatically invalidate the cache of every page that contains Album infobox, just the ones with the stars template in them (like any other template). - Lee (talk) 13:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Holding cell

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

Tools

There are several tools that can help when implementing TfDs. Some of these are listed below.

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

Closing discussions

The closing procedures are outlined at Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Closing instructions.

To review

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

• Template:Infobox_tropical_cyclone2024 March 10 – Infobox_tropical_cyclone ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Infobox_storm2024 March 10 – Infobox_storm ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WikiProject_Glass2024 November 5 – WikiProject_Glass ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:PIE2024 December 3 – PIE ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Instances should be replaced with {{lang|ine-x-proto}}. If the instance contains a phrase or sentence, |proto=no should be added to suppress the asterisk. —Compassionate727  14:17, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

To merge

Templates to be merged into another template.

Infoboxes

• Merge into the singular {{infobox ship}} (currently a redirect):
  • Template:Infobox_ship_begin2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_begin ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_ship_career2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_career ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_ship_characteristics2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_characteristics ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_ship_class_overview2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_class_overview ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_ship_image2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_image ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_service_record2022 April 30 – Infobox_service_record ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

    I have hacked Module:Infobox ship which implements ship infoboxen without the external wikitable that the above templates require. Uses Module:Infobox; {{infobox ship begin}} is no longer required; parameter names are changed from sentence- to snake-case; section header height for career, characteristics, service record sections is normalized; custom fields are supported. I chose to retain the individual section templates as subtemplates:

    • {{Infobox ship/image}}
    • {{Infobox ship/career}}
    • {{Infobox ship/characteristic}}
    • {{Infobox ship/class}}
    • {{Infobox ship/service record}} – Module:Infobox ship implements only the 'ship' portion of {{Infobox service record}}

    In the main infobox these subtemplates are called with the |section<n>= parameters (aliases of |data<n>=).

    Comparisons between wikitable infoboxen and Module:Infobox ship infoboxen can bee seen at my sandbox (permalink).

    —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

    Since the intent is to use Module:Infobox directly, why is Module:Infobox ship being used to generate the infobox? I can understand if there is need for a backend module to validate a value or something, but is there really a reason to have this unique code? Gonnym (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

    The original complaint was that the ship infoboxen templates are table templates masquerading as infobox templates. None of those templates use Module:Infobox. Module:Infobox ship answers that complaint. Yeah, we still have subtemplates, but, in my opinion, that is a good thing because the appropriate parameters and their data are contained in each particular subtemplate. The container subtemplates make it relatively easy for an editor reading an article's wikitext to understand. The current ship infobox system allows sections in any order (except for the position of {{infobox ship begin}} – not needed with Module:Infobox ship); whatever the final outcome of this mess, that facility must not be lost.

    Module:Infobox ship does do some error checking (synonymous parameters |ship_armor= / |ship_armour=, |ship_draft= / |ship_draught=, |ship_honors= / |ship_honours=, and |ship_stricken= / |ship_struck=). Whether {{infobox ship}} directly calls Module:Infobox or whether {{infobox ship}} calls Module:Infobox ship which then calls Module:Infobox is really immaterial so long as the final rendered result is a correctly formatted infobox.

    —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:06, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

    @Trappist the monk are you still interested in working on this Module? If not, I'd like to try to get it finished myself. The massive deviation I had in mind was to make one invocation of the module do everything. Each page will require individual attention to complete the merge into a proper infobox anyway, so I reason to go the extra mile to make it nicer in general. Repeatable parameters will have the normal n number appended to the end of the parameter. An alternative would be to have subboxes for repeating sections, which would be easier in general to replace and implement. SWinxy (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

    Sure, but I don't think that this page is the proper place to discuss. Choose some place more proper and let me know where that is?

    —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:58, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

• Replacement with {{Infobox aircraft}}:
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_type2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_type ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_career2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_career ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_program2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_program ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_begin2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_begin ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) → {{Infobox aircraft}}
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_engine2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_engine ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) → {{Infobox aircraft}}
    • For {{Infobox aircraft engine}}, There is an ongoing discussion about whether the aircraft engine Infobox should be merged with the Infobox aircraft or not. Except for the engine Infobox, other Infoboxes can be orphaned and there are no objection for that. Prarambh20 (talk) 22:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
      • This discussion is still ongoing, so I have moved it back to the "to merge" list with the others. Primefac (talk) 10:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
      • The discussion has now ended (diff), with the consensus NOT TO MERGE {{Infobox aircraft engine}} with the others. However {{infobox aircraft begin}} may or may not end up being merged into {{Infobox aircraft engine}}. The template pages should be updated accordingly. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
• Template:Infobox_climber2024 June 29 – Infobox_climber ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Infobox_mountaineer2024 June 29 – Infobox_mountaineer ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Merge into {{Infobox NFL biography}} and rename to {{Infobox gridiron football biography}}
  • Template:Infobox_Canadian_Football_League_biography2024 November 18 – Infobox_Canadian_Football_League_biography ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_NFL_biography2024 November 18 – Infobox_NFL_biography ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_gridiron_football_person2024 November 18 – Infobox_gridiron_football_person ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

Navigation templates

• None currently

Link templates

• Template:Lx2023 October 1 – Lx ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Pagelinks2023 October 1 – Pagelinks ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Because Lx has the option to hide certain links and PageLinks itself doesn't, a direct merge is impossible. The next best thing would be to convert the transclusions to invocations of Module:PageLinks. Doesn't look too impossible at first glance. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 00:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

    Problem: Lx's 20,000 transclusions are kinda fake, because almost all of them are transclusions of transclusions.
    Even if we restrict it to the template namespace, most of those are transclusions of transclusions of transclusions in the doc subpage. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 00:38, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

    The more I look at this, the more it appears technically infeasible. Lx has some really bizarre arguments like tag and label which can't be replicated by Module:PageLinks. When Lx was used to link to a normal page, namespace is usually Talk and label is usually talk, but when it's used to link to a talk page, either could be anything. Also, the recursive transclusion issue means the only way to get our pages would be an insource search, which means we'd also have to deal with pages like this.Replacing all uses of the format \{\{x\|1=\|2=(.*)\|3=Talk\|4=talk\}\} with {{Pagelinks|$1}} could be a start. From there, I'm totally lost. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 16:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

    What if we only replaced uses matching an insource search in the template namespace, and then substed everything else? Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 19:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

• Template:See_also_if_exists2024 December 13 – See_also_if_exists ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:See_also2024 December 13 – See_also ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

Other

• Template:Football_squad_player22020 February 1 – Football_squad_player2 ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) and Template:Football_squad_player2020 February 1 – Football_squad_player ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Note Pending Redesign RfC robertsky (talk) 18:51, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
    • I've closed the RfC. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 15:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
  • At this point this is ready for large scale replacement. I said a while ago that I could do it but due to me being quite busy IRL this seems unlikely to get done in a timely manner. If you feel like doing a large scale replacement job feel free to take this one. --Trialpears (talk) 17:34, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Trialpears, what large-scale replacement? I (foolishly?) jumped into this rabbit hole, and have been in it for over a day now. This is a very complex merge; I've got the documentation diff to show fewer differences, but there's still more to be done. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
• Template:Auto_compact_TOC2023 March 6 – Auto_compact_TOC ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Compact_TOC2023 March 6 – Compact_TOC ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Wikisource author2023 July 5 – Wikisource author ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Wikisourcelang2023 July 5 – Wikisourcelang ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Hi now that {{Wikisourcelang}} is being merged, how do I use the merge target template to point to sister language Wikisources? All the links keep incorrectly pointing to the English version and the documentation of {{Wikisource}} has not been updated about this. Folly Mox (talk) 20:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
    • Folly Mox, the merge has not yet been completed, so you should use the appropriate currently-existing template to do whatever it is you are planning until the merge is complete. The existing uses will be converted appropriately at that time. Primefac (talk) 09:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
      • Oops, I forgot I had posted here. My assertion was incorrectly based on the first instance I had tested, which had been misusing parameters in such a way that it worked prior to the start of the merge process but not afterwards. The links to en.s/lang:page do properly redirect if the parameters are used correctly, but I didn't initially follow the links to check. It was quite an embarrassing hour or so of my contribution history. Folly Mox (talk) 13:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
• Template:Wikisourcehas2023 July 5 – Wikisourcehas ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • I see I am not supposed to use {{Wikisourcehas}} on "additional padverages" so I have had to move to using {{Sister project}} because {{Wikisource}} does not have the required functionality. I shall look out for further developments because some very clever coding will be needed. Thincat (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
  • For over a year now we have been instructed not to use {{Wikisource author}}, {{Wikisourcelang}} and {{Wikisourcehas}} and this is a nuisance because avoiding their use is not at all trivial. Can we have a report on progress with the merge, please, or permission to again use these templates? Thincat (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
    • See Primefac's note above. Just keep using the existing templates. They will be converted for you during the merge process, whenever it happens (these merges sometimes take a while, as you can see above). When the conversion is done, the merged template will support the features that you need. That's how it's supposed to work, anyway. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

      Thank you. That's helpful. Is there a change that could be usefully made to the display text in {{being deleted}}? Or maybe the assumption is that no one reads beyond the first line anyway. Thincat (talk) 20:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

• Template:Facebook_page2024 February 21 – Facebook_page ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Facebook2024 February 21 – Facebook ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • While the result was "merge" it seems that this should be moved to "convert" as looking at Craig Kilborn, the ID used there is "The-Kilborn-File/107748632605752", while the new one is at https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100082874612029. The number is different. Unless I'm missing something else there is nothing here to merge. --Gonnym (talk) 10:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
• Template:R_fully_protected2024 September 17 – R_fully_protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:R_template-protected2024 September 17 – R_template-protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:R_extended-protected2024 September 17 – R_extended-protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:R_semi-protected2024 September 17 – R_semi-protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:R_protected2024 September 17 – R_protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:AfD_new_user2024 October 18 – AfD_new_user ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:At_school_occasional2024 November 22 – At_school_occasional ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:At_school2024 November 22 – At_school ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Cricket_Result2024 December 6 – Cricket_Result ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Cricket_result2024 December 6 – Cricket_result ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:STN2024 December 6 – STN ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Station2024 December 6 – Station ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Incomprehensible2024 December 13 – Incomprehensible ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Confusing2024 December 13 – Confusing ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Plural_form2024 December 4 – Plural_form ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Plural_abbr2024 December 4 – Plural_abbr ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WPBASEBALL_assessment_level_category2024 December 8 – WPBASEBALL_assessment_level_category ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WPANIMATION_assessment_quality_work_group_level2024 December 8 – WPANIMATION_assessment_quality_work_group_level ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WikiProject_Television_task_force_assessment_category2024 December 8 – WikiProject_Television_task_force_assessment_category ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WPANIMATION_assessment_quality_work_group_level2024 December 8 – WPANIMATION_assessment_quality_work_group_level ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:How-to2024 December 3 – How-to ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) merge {{manual}} into this template
• Template:Manual2024 December 3 – Manual ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) merge into {{how-to}}

Meta

• None currently

To convert

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

• 2023 October 25
  • Template:R to related2023 October 25 – R to related ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - convert to {{R from related word}} or {{R to related topic}} as appropriate
  • Adding this from RfD as it's template related. --Gonnym (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

    Started toying with this and came to the conclusion that I was very the wrong person because there are definitely cases where the appropriate template is neither of the two of interest. We need to leave this refinement on the user talk pages of some people who know what they're doing. Izno (talk) 22:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

• Template:S-line/IT-Eurostar_left/Frecciabianca2024 April 25 – S-line/IT-Eurostar_left/Frecciabianca ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:S-line/IT-Eurostar_right/Frecciabianca2024 April 25 – S-line/IT-Eurostar_right/Frecciabianca ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Module:Adjacent_stations/Trenitalia2024 April 25 – Module:Adjacent_stations/Trenitalia ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:S-s2024 September 30 – S-s ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Lang-crh32024 November 4 – Lang-crh3 ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

  perhaps convert to something like {{lang-sr-Latn-Cyrl}} which wraps {{lang-x2}}. Example using {{lang-x2}} as a mockup:

  Crimean Tatar: Bır Hacı Geray, بیر-حاجى كراى‎ ← {{lang-crh3|Bır Hacı Geray|بیر-حاجى كراى}}

  Crimean Tatar: Bır Hacı Geray, بیر-حاجى كراى ← {{lang-x2|crh|Bır Hacı Geray|script2=Arab|بیر-حاجى كراى}}

  —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:31, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Template:WikiProject_Buckethead_task_force2024 November 14 – WikiProject_Buckethead_task_force ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

  Merge target needs clarification. The target is a wrapper of biography, but the task force is under WikiProject Guitarists which uses Template:WikiProject Guitarists. --Gonnym (talk) 13:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

  My closing statement does not involve Musicians so as to avoid the wrapping issue. There was no consensus the last time around to merge into Guitarists and no indication in the latest TFD that the opinion had changed. Primefac (talk) 21:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

• Template:KWh2024 December 6 – KWh ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Replace with {{Political parties in the Netherlands}} and {{Defunct political parties in the Netherlands}} as appropriate:
  • Template:Liberal_political_parties_in_the_Netherlands2024 December 10 – Liberal_political_parties_in_the_Netherlands ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Socialist_parties_in_the_Netherlands2024 December 10 – Socialist_parties_in_the_Netherlands ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:FCC_letter2024 December 16 – FCC_letter ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

  Sammi Brie, do existing transclusions need to be replaced with anything or is straight deletion suitable? (please do not ping on reply) Primefac (talk) 19:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  Manual conversion to citation templates or external links. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 21:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

To substitute

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

• None currently

To orphan

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

• None currently

Ready for deletion

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

• None currently

Listings

= December 26

Template:Mos4

• Delete: This template contradicts principle 2.2 from the jguk 2 case. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:38, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete along with Mos2-3, and half of its category. Phil Sandifer 17:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:User UT-Austin

Delete: This template is redundant; one serving the same purpose already exists at Template:User_longhorn. -Rebelguys2 09:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Redundant. -Scm83x 09:47, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
Delete Created in error, unaware of existing template. Mea Culpa.1001001 10:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

December 25

Template:Infobox Proprietary Software

Delete: Obsolete by {{Infobox Software}}. - David Björklund (talk) 23:54, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nom --Wikiacc (talk) 02:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Unless someone can provide a way to properly hide the license field of Template:Infobox Software in *all* browsers (including lynx). None of the methods proposed so far do this. The template was introduced to solve a specific problem see Template_talk:Infobox Software. - Motor (talk) 10:32, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Flensburg infobox

Delete unused and redundant with {{Infobox Town DE}} --Sherool (talk) 23:13, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Equatorial Guinea infobox

Delete: This template seems to be a copy of the infobox in article Equatorial Guinea and is apparently not used anywhere. Thuresson 18:11, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete orphaned. --Wikiacc (talk) 02:21, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:PureStates

Delete: "Pure" states? Anyway, not used. dbenbenn | talk 03:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. It looks like this was created for a user page, but the user doesn't have it on his user page anymore, so it can be deleted without affecting anyone or anything. --Metropolitan90 04:19, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and recommend creator to use user page subpages for this purpose in the future. — Phil Welch Katefan's ridiculous poll 18:28, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Per above. -- Jbamb 17:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:User Feminist

Sexist anti-female propaganda by User:D-Day:

User:D-Day decided this, {{User Feminist}}, would be a good addition to Misplaced Pages:Userboxes/Beliefs. The symbol for feminism, as picked by D-Day is "I h8 men" with a link to Feminism.

Somehow, I don't agree: This is nothing but sexist propaganda by D-Day (who I've not talked to before, I just noticed this template addition as the Userboxes project pages are all on my watchlist), designed to convey falsehoods like "all feminists hate men"/"feminists are lesbians", etc --Mistress Selina Kyle 17:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Votes: *Delete --Mistress Selina Kyle 17:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC) (nominator)

• Keep' My apologies if this was offensive. It was created in an attempt to be a lighter tone and I did not mean to offend anyone, nor set any kind of prejudice. I'll change it to try to make it less offensive. --D-Day 17:47, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

• • • Vote cancelled by nominator — Ok, never mind. --Mistress Selina Kyle 18:02, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

December 24

Template:Infobox BridgeSpecificWithMap

Duplicates main Template:Infobox Bridge now that support for the map was made optional. Was only used on four articles, so I moved them to Infobox Bridge. -- Netoholic @ 18:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - Thanks for making the changes to make the parameters optional by the way! ++Lar 20:38, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - Adrian Buehlmann 21:41, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, redundant. - Bobet 14:02, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Police Officer

Seems a tad too specific. Only used on two articles, which are themselves up for deletion. -- Netoholic @ 09:59, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Reluctant delete, yes it does seem too specific, and prone to encourage memorials which are unencyclopediatic. — Eoghanacht 10:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - the idea is not to encourage memorials. It is to pay tribute to those warriors who are living today and those who have left this world. I see that Misplaced Pages is being infiltrated by editors who wish to bring politics into these situations. A few rogue Vandalizers should not be able to wield power in such a negative way.CelebritySecurity 18:11, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Misplaced Pages is not the place for memorials. --JiFish(/_Contrib) 18:16, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
    • It is not a memorial. It part of an ongoing effort to encourage information about living and deceased warriors. http://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Canadian_law_enforcement_officers Please respect the hard work of others and the political implications of your actions. Reminder: This is "free" encyclopedia. The overhwleming effort by certain individuals/admins here on wikipedia to both vandalize and eliminate those parts of the encyclopedia that include a broader focus on law enforcement issues is alarming and should be of concern to those who believe in freedom of information. CelebritySecurity 18:26, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
      • WP:NOT a soapbox, either. android79 18:28, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. "Prone to encourage" memorials can be said about ANY of the biographical infoboxes here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CelebritySecurity (talk • contribs)
  • That's not right; that's not even wrong. --Calton | Talk 01:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Weak Delete per nomination. --JiFish(/_Contrib) 00:50, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per "Only used on two articles, which are themselves up for deletion". Adrian Buehlmann 21:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• ...the idea is not to encourage memorials. It is to pay tribute... Guy, you contradict yourself almost immediately. Misplaced Pages is not a memorial, nor a soapbox. Delete. --Calton | Talk 01:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete overly specific. --Wikiacc (talk) 02:15, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. DES 02:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Early Muslim conflicts

Listing for Zora. gren グレン 05:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as it stands this template really gets in the way. If it's kept, which I think right now is a bad idea, it should be made much smaller and so it is put at the bottom of articles. We have battle boxes which are supposed to go where Striver has put it. gren グレン 05:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• i also agree that it should be deleted. at the very least, someone needs to edit it, as it has numerous grammar and spelling errors (why are there no apostrophes?!). but moreover, i'm just not sure how the template really adds anything. Dgl 11:07, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. I don't really know much about the topic, but if it makes sense to group them together, I don't see why not have it. Further, the complaint about the apostrophes is trivial, I have just fixed that. –Andyluciano 19:04, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment The "them" that are being grouped are highly heterogeneous. They aren't all "conflicts", for one thing. The Hijra was not a conflict. Succession to Muhammad was a political struggle, but not a battle. Treaties aren't conflicts! The timeline is also undefined. After complaining to the creator of the template, who is a Shi'a Muslim, that ending the template with the Battle of Karbala was POV, he added one other revolt. But why stop there? Why not everything that happened during the Umayyad caliphate? Also, even with the punctuation problems fixed, there are still red links, mispellings, etc. We have one editor weighing in here, Dgl, who has a master's degree in Islamic studies. He wrote the article on the Battle of al-Qādisiyyah. If he thinks this template is useless, it's useless. We already have extensive interlinking between Islamic history articles, plus an article on Islamic history, plus a timeline of Islamic history. That's enough to orient readers. Zora 20:28, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Very well, I stand corrected. I made my post because no one explained why it ought to be deleted, and now you have done that. Thanks. –Andyluciano 08:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
      • Thanks for your openmindedness and willingness to listen. Zora 09:24, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. If all that is needed is a chronological list of battles, the proper way to do it is via a campaignbox template. —Kirill Lokshin 21:27, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

December 23

Template:Literarypunkgenre

Delete: Seeing as most of the articles that this template links together are listed at AfD, I thought it should join them. I suspect its creator wants it gone, as he recently blanked the page. - EurekaLott 23:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Delete Salt the Earth --J13 23:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Avogadro94 01:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Signed

Delete: Considering that we already have the "unsigned" template, I don't think we need a "signed" one. HappyCamper 23:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. If it's signed, why would we have to...? This template confuses me.--Sean|Black 23:51, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• BJAODN? Pointless template, most decidedly a bad idea because of ~~~~. The only uses I've seen are an anon just wanting to sign as User:anon. At the very least delete. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:03, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Image-license

• Delete: Created to standardize image templates and leave room for the EXIF Metatable (in its old location). Now that the metatable has moved and some uses have been reverted, it's time for this to go. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Please see below for a short but important note regarding the nomination.
• Delete: seems to have relatively little usage? I added {{tfd-inline|Image-license}} to it to alert folks. ++Lar 16:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • The reason there was no TfD notice on the template was to prevent any problems with how it is used with subst. (I put it on the talk page instead). I do not object to its appearance, however. (The subst part just gives the impression it is not used, but of all of our licensing templates it still hasn't enjoyed widespread use.) --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Ah. Well the subst usages aren't going to be affected by it going away, they already are subst'd in, right? The actual transcludes of it seem very rare unless I was misinterpreting "what links here"... But please feel free to revert me if you like! ++Lar 21:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
      • I checked the whatlinkshere... no transclusion that I can tell. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Somebody should have checked the talk page. It's a work in progress to standardize all image license, primarily to make license information machine-readable. Any help with that work is appreciated. Zocky 18:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Zocky ++Lar 04:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
• Er, never mind then. Abstain and withdraw nomination. (Although the spacing for the EXIF Metatable can go...) --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:if

Delete: Not used. – Adrian | Talk 09:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, it is an API to be used in other templates. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 09:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It has been deprecated and is defunct. See also Template talk:if. – Adrian | Talk 09:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Good to know. Changing my vote to to Del ←Humus sapiens←ну? 09:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete now it's no longer required. —Phil | Talk 10:12, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete my bot didnt touch 15,000 articles for nothing. Martin 10:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Weak redirect to {{qif}} Delete and rename {{qif}} to {{if}}. Once we've got rid of the old template, the new and improved one should be given the obvious name. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 12:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, of course. More to come soon. -- Netoholic @ 14:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I never want to see this thing again. —Lifeisunfair 14:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete this and related templates; the trouble and confusion they cause more than offsets the value they add. Radiant_>|< 18:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and rename {{qif}} to {{if}}, per Ilmari Karonen. Shawnc 22:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• I would propose not to do a redirect. qif is at the moment an extreme high use template: What links here lists 31'000+ articles. A redirect means an additional database lookup, which should be avoided. At least, if there is a real need to have qif under the name if, please copy the contents of qif to if. Do not create a redirect. Disclaimer: Beware of WP:AUM. Adrian Buehlmann 12:41, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
  • My intent was to imply that, if a rename is done, another bot run should be performed to change all instances of {{qif}} (back) to {{if}}. But the naming issue is actually rather minor, and it may not actually be worth doing anything about until this entire logic template controversy is settled. Hopefully we'll eventually get new MediaWiki syntax that will obsolete all these templates, preferably sooner that later. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 14:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Jtkiefer ---- 08:16, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• I'd prefer protecting it as a blank template, so editors can have access to its edit history. Keep the talk page so that people who're interested would be able to know what'd been happening. — Instantnood 20:33, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, meta-template, unused and deprecated in favor of {{qif}}. --Wikiacc (talk) 02:23, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
• Blank and protect per Instantnood... ++Lar 14:42, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:HKCrownCopyright

in zh wp deleted. seezh:Misplaced Pages:删除投票和请求/2005年12月15日 and --Shizhao 01:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Keep for now - Original discussion can be found in Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Hong Kong. The deletion was not properly conducted in the Chinese Misplaced Pages, as the participants have misinterpreted "District Council" (a government statutory body) as "British Council" (a quasi-official, non-Hong Kong organization) who corresponded with PZFUN. Until the status of the template has been properly discussed, I would go for keeping this template for now. Carlsmith 11:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep per Carlsmith. (Btw there are 18 district councils, and therefore statutory bodies.) — Instantnood 20:29, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Middle-earth portal

Delete:"Easter egg" style link to Portal:Middle-earth. This is bad in terms of navigation, as the reader has no idea what the link is, and to further complicate things, they'd likely assume that the image links there too. I don't think that a link to Portal:Middle-earth needs a template. On some pages, this template can cause appearance issues as it clutters up the space, especially those with some templates and images already. See for example The Lord of the Rings (1978 film), The Lord of the Rings film trilogy, Category:Middle-earth. This kind of link would be more appropriate in text form under "See also" headings, however not on all ~80 pages it currently exists on. --Qirex 01:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Note: I moved the portal down on The Lord of the Rings (1978 film) - this link shows where it was when Qirex commented above on it causing appearance issues. --CBD _☎ 01:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Further note: the picture link has been fixed, thanks to Locke Cole, and I just added Middle Earth Portal to the caption. --Go for it! 04:38, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Nomination withdrawn because, as CBD pointed out, this is "a discussion for Misplaced Pages talk:Portal to determine if the way all portals are linked". I'm sorry that I didn't better research the whole portals thing and save everyone the bother. Thank you Locke Cole and Go for it! for making improvements to the template.

Question: should I go ahead and remove the tfd tag and place tfd-kept to the template talk page or is that something only an admin does? --Qirex 15:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe an admin may close it early if you, as the nominator, have withdrawn your nomination (which you've done). Especially since the voting is leaning heavily towards keep. —Locke Cole 15:53, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

The page may be speedily kept if the nominator withdraws his nomination and there are no "delete" votes. Or if someone wants to flex their WP:IAR muscles. Ξxtreme Unction|_{yakkity yak} 16:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

As of this writing there appears to be one "delete" vote, perhaps that voter could be persuaded to change his vote? (IIRC, he has been tagged as an inclusionist in some circles... smile)++Lar 00:18, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

'Fraid not. I really dislike portal templates. Phil Sandifer 00:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Why? You didn't explain your vote before. Is it something that can be fixed? --CBD _☎ 01:25, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - Obviously as the creator I'm biased. That said, at most I'd think the template should be changed if consensus finds that it's purpose is confusing. Some of the issues listed above are actually standard practice for portals. For instance, it is standard to link articles related to a portal to that portal and put the portal links at the top of the page - see for instance Template:Philosophy portal and Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Philosophy portal. Where images at the top of the page conflict the portal link can be moved down, as it always was for The Lord of the Rings, Middle-earth, History of Arda, and various others. The 'easter egg' was intended to be self evident to anyone familiar with the topic and follow the general concept of making portals 'personalized' to the topics they cover, but if there is concern about that the text can easily be replaced with a generic 'Middle-earth portal' message. --CBD _☎ 01:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment - Undecided at the moment, but I'd like to add that I had no idea what it was when I first saw it. My first impulse was to delete it from the page because I took it for an irrelevant image (on The Hobbit, where the door of Moria isn't germaine to the subject) and didn't notice what it was until I was editing the page. It doesn't communicate its purpose very well even to one intimately familiar with the subject. But really, I think Misplaced Pages features should be aimed at the general reader. I'd vote to delete it in its present form, but with appropriate changes I'd vote to keep it. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - Recent changes are improvements, but could a different image be found? The current one is barely recognizable, and unless you already know what it's supposed to be it doesn't look in the least like a door. Not at my screen resolution anyway. (1024x768 on a 19" CRT. Didn't look good on the flat panel I use at work either.) TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

    Really? It looked pretty good on my screens, but I tend to use higher resolution (1280 x 1024). I'll check it under different settings and see if it can be cleaned up. --CBD _☎ 12:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep: I'm glad I spotted this one. It's creative. An element that is often stifled in encyclopedias. But this is Misplaced Pages, which encourages creativity and novel approaches to encyclopedia design. Though a portal link such as this should mention the portal. Simply add the link "Middle-earth portal" in a sentence immediately following the fabled line from the book. So that takes care of the easter egg issue. As for the picture, is there any way to make a picture part of a link? I'd really like to know. If not, perhaps it can be iconized. But this doesn't matter, since the picture is definitely on-theme, and if its text includes "Middle-earth portal", the user will know that's a clickable link. But the picture is a bit dark, and itself needs to be freshened up, but that's easy to fix. I agree that the template clashes on some pages, but it is a nice touch on those with nothing to clash with. And the statement about "this kind of link would be more appropriate in text form under "See also" headings" argues against portal link templates in general, but they are in common use throughout Misplaced Pages, so this is not the place to be pushing such an agenda, as it pertains to general policy. Portal link templates are a Misplaced Pages tradition, and are a means to centralize portals, which helps portals be precisely what they are supposed to be: centralized. Therefore, this deletion nomination should never have been posted. Instead, an effort should have been made to fix the template and adjust its placement. I don't see any evidence of such an effort on Qirex's part. Just a knee-jerk "let's kill it" response. Besides, this portal link accents the Middle-earth theme quite well, and using a picture of a portal to represent a Misplaced Pages portal is brilliant. This one's a keeper. Go for it! 02:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I think to characterise this nomination as "a knee-jerk "let's kill it" response" is a misrepresentation. I came across template when I noticed some placement issues of {{bakshi}}, and went to ~10 pages to see if I could resolve the problem (see the second and third pages of my contribs). I am a firm believer in fixing problems where they exist. I nominated this template because I honestly do not see the need to place large and prominent links to portals mixed in with the main body of text, and if the template is to go at the bottom of the page anyway, then it may as well be represented with plain text under an internal links section; simpler is better. --Qirex 08:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

    Qirex, I can see your viewpoint, but the problem is that it runs contrary to virtually EVERY portal on Misplaced Pages. I didn't come up with the idea of putting portal links with images at the top of related articles... I just followed the standard set by earlier portals in doing so. Most of them use the generic portal link template, but it's still an image box. I haven't found a single WikiPortal which follows the 'text link in 'See also' section' standard you propose. This is therefore really a discussion for Misplaced Pages talk:Portal to determine if the way all portals are linked should be changed. --CBD _☎ 12:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. I'd like to vote 'delete' but alas, I cannot. I wouldnt read them books if I was tortured, but I understand that some people adore poor prose – so for their sake I vote this way.--Ezeu 02:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Phil Sandifer 02:42, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, I've fixed it so if the image is clicked on, it also takes you to the Portal (and not to the Image info). —Locke Cole 02:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I think it's pretty cool. I know that's not exactly the strongest argument on Misplaced Pages, but there you have it. Kafziel 03:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Quite a good argument if whosoever admin agrees with you. --Ezeu 04:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Some of noms issues have been resolved, and others can be fixed by where its placed on the page. And, if for some reason it really doesnt work on a page, just dont use the graphic version, it's all optional anyway. --Stbalbach 05:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - It can be very easily improved (and certainly will be) into a worthwhile portal link. In addition to changing the text and sharpening up or replacing the image, I would propose moving the text to the side as with the Philosophy portal, which I think is more attractive and less intrusive on the page. AGGoH 09:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

December 22

Template:NYC Hudson River crossings

Delete: A template covering the entire Hudson River, Template:Hudson River crossings, has been created (and already used north of the city line), and I think it would be good to put that all along the Hudson River. Having both would make them a bit cluttered, not to mention the fact that all really within the City have Template:NY-bt. I have already put notices on all of the talk pages for these articles, and noone has strongly objected. I suggest that first Template:Hudson River crossings be used all along, and then, pending the result of this TFD, all instances of Template:NYC Hudson River crossings be removed and it be deleted. Redirection would not work, since the newer one uses north and south parameters. Chris 16:31, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: per nom. It should be noted that user Cacophony, active in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Bridges, thinks that the other, newer one: Template:Hudson River crossings, is the one to delete. However I feel that all 3 are not needed in one article (see, for example Lincoln Tunnel for an example of the clutter having all three gives), and that Template:NY-bt makes Template:NYC Hudson River crossings redundant, while Template:NYC Hudson River crossings does not extend far enough upriver to handle, for example, Kingston-Rhinecliff Bridge, nor should it, and Template:Hudson River crossings does. ++Lar 17:01, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Redundant. Kafziel 03:30, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:ReligionScotland

I liked this template at first look, as a navigation around Scots religions. But, it isn't. There are no Scotland specific articles on the non-Christian faiths listed and the links just go to the general article. So, this is not a navigation aid, but just a very incomplete list of religions in Scotland. If we completed it, it would be unmanagable as a template. A link from the articles this template is on to the article Religion in Scotland would achieve everything this template does without POV decisions as to what to include. Delete (recreate if Scotland specific articles on the major faiths appear later) --Doc 10:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep: At least seven of those article links are to specific Scottish churches. If anything the fact that the non-christian links are not specific simply means they need articles created at some point. It's got a strong Christian bias for the Scotland-specific articles, but that bias reflects religion in Scotland too. Thanks/wangi 10:07, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

But tell me what use it is? Why is this preferable to a category? I agree that non-Christian Scottish articles would be desirable, but there are none as of now. Why is it useful to be able to navigate from the Church of Scotland article, to a general article on Budhism - with no explanation as to its significance to Scotland? I've no objections to this being recreated as a 'Christian denominations in Scotland' template - and then perhaps later recreated as 'Religion in Scotland' when we have articles on various faiths. But as it stands now tis template has no utility and is just plain clutter. --Doc 10:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. A template may be useful in the future, but I think a category would be better until such a time as there are specific articles on non-Christian religions in Scotland. --GraemeL 13:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I have just found Category:Religion in Scotland - I think it suffices for now. --Doc 13:43, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Don't see any reason to delete an OK template. FearÉIREANN\ 18:38, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: Ashibaka edited the template to remove the non-specific religions. I've then fixed up the display and corrected the tfd link (it wasn't added correctly and didn't have a proper link to this discussion). Thanks/wangi 12:55, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep: I Davidkinnen created this template to facilitate the growth of Religion in Scotland. It is rather sad that rather than time being spent on creating Scotland specific articles we are proposing to delete a template about Religion in Scotland. Davidkinnen 17:01, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

December 21

Template:Irish Republicanism

Delete: Impossible topic to be actively NPOV with and guaranteed to produce endless edit wars over who is a real republican party and who isn't (Republican Sinn Féiners and Sinn Féiners will fight about each others' true republicanism for a start, while Fine Gael, a pro-Commonwealth party in the 1940s, actually declared the Republic of Ireland some would argue should be in on that basis), what linear links join what organisation (were the Officials marxist or republican), whose analysis is valid/invalid/biased, etc. Also inaccurate in many places - Griffith was a monarchist. Connolly wanted a socialist republic not a nationalist republic. Why is Bobby Sands in but Sean MacBride out in the list of "key figures"? How key is Sands anyway? What about Sean MacStiofáin? Cathal Goulding? Sean Lemass? The topic is far too complicated and already provokes too many edit wars across a range of articles without adding a template full of questionable presumptions and definitions, most of them POV, into the mix. This is one template due an early trip to the wiki-bin.

• delete FearÉIREANN\ 22:58, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. POV magnet, topic is too broad for a template of this type.--Sean|Black 01:38, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. May provoke edit wars, but we can manage with things like fasicsm... -- Jbamb 23:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• keep: if you want Sean MacStiofain add him, when I made it I made it clear it was just the skeleton of a template and that it should be added to, I didn't want it as my creation, the many pages that relate to Irish Republicanism have no coherent order at all, this Template could go some way to bringing a bit of order. Communism has a Template, with POV issues all the time, why not delete that too eh? How about the Anarchism one, that's a really broad topic too, send it to the wiki-bin? Escobar600ie 15:42, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Wildly POV part of the provo claim to be the true faith descendents of the War of Independence. --Red King 18:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Lapsed Pacifist 18:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - POV.--File Éireann 19:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep but change. It makes sense to have a template for Irish Republican organisations. Other political ideologies have one, so why not Irish republicanism? However, it should definitely be removed from articles on the war of independence, civil war, the troubles and other historical events. These have a much wider importance in Irish history than merely the activities of one strain of Irish political thought. If no one objects, I'm going to do this. Also, the content of the template needs to be changed. Earlier organisations like the United Irishmen should go in for example, so should Clann na Phoblachta, the Republican Congress etc. Also, the list of people should be removed, because it will be impossible for people who agree on who goes in. Jdorney 19:35, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete I had some misgivings of this when it appeared first. As pointed out previously I could see this turning into a pov quagmire of who is the one, true faith. Djegan 19:38, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Neutral for now. The idea that this could become a quagmire isn't the most compelling reason to delete. I also take issue with some of the alleged inaccuracies. Griffith started out as a monarchist, but can you really argue that when he took his seat in Dail Eireann he was still one then? Likewise whether Connolly was a socalist republican or a nationalist one, he was still a republican. But I do see issues arising as to who gets into the template. Why not Tom Clarke or John Devoy? It could certainly be problematical, but I'm not entirely convinced it doesn't deserve a chance. -R. fiend 20:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Considering the pov-warriors and clear out lunatics we get editing the articles under this template to serve their own POV, or in some cases, completely fantastical alternate histories, there isn't a chance in hell that such a template could be NPOV, ever. --Kiand 20:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Any non-POV version of this template would have to be so broadly inclusive as to be meaningless. --Ryano 20:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Hideous, doesn't add anything. -- Daily 22: 38, 23 December 2005

Some User templates

To remove

Template:User 2.05, Template:User es 1337, Template:User ca 1337, Template:User_ast_1337

• Delete — Strange templates _→AzaToth 20:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. All four seem like abandoned tests. Owen× ☎ 21:21, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete all four not used, first looks like a test, the others look like somone was trying to reserve userbox fictious languages' foreign language equivs. xaosflux /_CVU 08:10, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete violet/riga (t) 10:24, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Userfy

Template:User Tony Sidaway/User Template:User:shreshth91/welcome-2 Template:User:shreshth91/welcome Template:User:APclark/Babel Template:User:Alex Nisnevich/sidebar Template:User:Alex Nisnevich/sig Template:User:Autoit script Template:User:Carnildo/Nospam Template:User:Cool Cat/Imposter Template:User:DaGizza/Sg Template:User:DaGizza/Welcome for Cricket Template:User:DaGizza/Welcome for Rugby Template:User:Encyclopedist/Usercomment Template:User:Encyclopedist/Welcome! Template:User:Gator1/dbtemplate Template:User:Ianbrown/Templates/away Template:User:SWD316/sidebar Template:User:Shreshth91/welcome Template:User:SimonMayer/Nav Box Template:User:Super-Magician/Main Template:User:Super-Magician/Sandbox Template:User:Super-Magician/Signature Template:User:Super-Magician/Signature/Time Template:User:Super-Magician/Signature nosign Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/AST Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/CDT Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/CST Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/EDT Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatus/EST Template:User:Super-Magician/StormStatusNone Template:User:Super-Magician/Wikistress3D/Left Template:User:Super-Magician/Wikistress3D/Right Template:User:TShilo12/Welcome Template:User:V.Molotov/Welcome! Template:User:cacumer/linkbox Template:User/Manjith Template:User-alfakim-signature

• Userfy — clearly missplaced user templates _→AzaToth 20:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• • Keep these. Not sure if it's still true, but at the time I created my user templates there were serious operational problems with templates created outside template space. These templates are all clearly identified and do no harm. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 21:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Harmless where they are, and used by their respective authors. Owen× ☎ 21:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• • • Comment As far as i know, templates outside tempalte space now work just fine -- i have tested several in my user space before moving them to template space, and I have a couple for personal use that stay in my user space. But i don't know what the problems were before, so i can't be sure that they are gone. DES 21:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Templates in userspace work fine these days, so I would prefer if the various users mentioned here moved these templates to their userspace. But I see little point in deleting them. Radiant_>|< 22:21, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy keep. Pointless and frankly absurd nomination. It is this sort of nonsense that gives this page and the whole deletion process a bad name. FearÉIREANN\ 23:00, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfy if it works in user space now, that's where it belongs. -- Jbamb 23:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• I don't think a userfy would hurt, but don't delete them. Titoxd 02:56, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfying sounds reasonable. There's no need for them to be in the template space. — Knowledge Seeker দ 03:32, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfy. Single user templates like these in the Template namespace aught to have a speedy-move criteria. 04:01, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
  • There is no policy against moving anything belonging to a user, or only used by that user, into that user's userspace (but it would be nice to ask the user first). Userfy, no problems with speedying. Radiant_>|< 12:53, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfy - obvious course of action. Thanks for finding all these AzaToth, sorry to see your hard work called "pointless" and "absurd". violet/riga (t) 10:24, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Userfy. Those silly kids need to stop emptying their sand-filled boots on Jimbo's the cabal's our floor. Cernen 11:36, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Hebrewterm

Makes a pretty cluttery little box that gives the translation of a Hebrew term. This causes a colossal mess on pages already overloaded with boxes and navigational aids, and the translation of a word can easily be mentioned in the text without any further need for boxes. JFW | T@lk 19:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. JFW | T@lk 19:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Per nominator.Template has changed to have the box removed --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 19:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete--Amir E. Aharoni 20:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC) (a little history: my first vote :) )
  • Comment: A proper etymology template is what Misplaced Pages needs. I'm really sorry to disappoint Humus sapiens.--Amir E. Aharoni 07:19, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Humus sapiens convinced me. This is a 💕 and i exercise my right to change my mind. The way it looks now at Yerida is OK. Some structure is better than no structure at all. I still think that there's a need for a proper etymology template, though.--Amir E. Aharoni 09:41, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Let's discuss first: this is a day-old template, still in development. The possibilities are to add pronunciation/sound link, etc. or it may be made a single-line template. Now it is similar to Template:Arabicterm, Template:Russianterm. Remove or move it around in the articles where you think it adds clutter. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 20:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete; I really don't see why we can't include a Hebrew word, its transliteration or translation in a text if it's needed, without using a box. EldKatt (Talk) 20:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: it doesn't necessarily have to be a box, another option is to make it in-text. The idea was to introduce consistency, please see Template talk:Hebrewterm. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 23:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Consistency in formatting is great, but I think more flexibility is needed than this template can provide. You don't always need a translation of a term, for example (if the meaning is implied by the context or explained elsewhere), and in such and similar cases it's undesirable to rely on this template for consistency of style. A guideline of some kind would be more flexible and useful. EldKatt (Talk) 11:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Upon seeing it used at Yerida, I suddenly understand its point. I previously assumed that it were supposed to be used in articles wherever a Hebrew word is used, which I do think is not a good idea. But keep, for use in the head of articles such as Yerida. EldKatt (Talk) 11:21, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep: I agree that as it is, it is an annoyance. If we could use it for making inline use of foriegn terms more consistent, then great! But see my comments on Template Talk. I'm willing to change my vote if this becomes feasible or surely unfeasible. jnothman 23:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - Completely rewritten to be in-text with optional params: plural and audio for now. Please reconsider/comment/improve rather than delete. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 03:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This looks very useful. SlimVirgin 05:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Change - As it is I can see little need for it - there is no appreciable saving of keystrokes, all it add is consistency (good but not worth the candle). If this was formatted up like the Template:Arabicterm then there are far more possiblities. Then I would vote keep but not as it is! Kevinalewis 11:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Actually it was created as a box, but the consensus seems to have it in-text. Could you tell us what are "far more possiblities", perhaps they can be accomodated in this or another template. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 11:42, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep it as a text version as with {{hebrewterm|ירידה|yerida|descent}} in Yerida. But hey, what is this going to do to all of User:Gilgamesh's "Tiberian Hebrew" extras in so many of the Hebrew worded articles? Hmmm, where is he? I think I'll ask him to come over and give his POV. IZAK 08:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Oy! If needed, we can add more optional params. I am learning the syntax, so any help is appreciated. ←Humus sapiens←ну? 08:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Please do not condescend... Tiberian vocalization is the original standard of the Masoretic Text. Even if it has little modern Ashkenazi Orthodox Jewish religious significance, it's linguistic significance is incalculable. If you differentiate the differences between the different modern liturgical Hebrew practices (Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Romaniote, Iraqi, Yemenite, etc.), you get 99% of the same linguistic detail laid out in Tiberian and elegantly described with Tiberian vowel points. But that's besides the point of this vote... - Gilgamesh 18:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per EldKatt (Talk) 11:21, 22 December 2005 (UTC)—msh210 17:31, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and Expand to include niqqud, Tiberian (Masoretic) vocalization and Standard Hebrew (Eliezer ben Yehuda) transcription (e.g. those official Israeli government spellings that few outside the CBS uses, but are still of value to linguists). Such things can be left blank until someone knowledgeable of them can fill them in. - Gilgamesh 18:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment Though this template is useful sometimes, other times it has its shortcomings. For instance, a topic may have linguistic information in addition to Hebrew and Jewish practice. For instance, many Old Testament figures are also prominent in Islam and have Arabic names, e.g. Jalut for Goliath and Hajar for Hagar. Additionally, even some Hebrew words, such as "rabbi," have even niqqud-level differences based on tradition, e.g. "ribbi" in most non-Ashkenazi historical texts, but "rabbi" in Ashkenazi and (because of the Ashkenazi elite in Israeli society) Israeli Hebrew. - Gilgamesh 18:10, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Db-crystalball

Used for speedy deletion on grounds that "Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball". But that is not in fact a criterion for speedy deletion. Radiant_>|< 15:12, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Owen× ☎ 15:16, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Crush by elephant (delete) Templates giving speedy delete reasons not supported by WP:CSD] are very pernicious. Indeed perhaps they should be speedy deleted? (Grin). DES 17:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Also, {{Crystalball}} which is a redirect to this template should be deleted for the same reasons. DES 17:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, to avoid CSD-creep. Titoxd 21:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Squishy squishy. -- Jbamb 23:52, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not a CSD reasoning (these are all cases for AfD). BTW, the {{Crystalball}} redirect was created by a move for consistency reasons by me, {{Crystalball}} was the original name of the template. Just wanted to note this. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: not all "crystal ball" articles are even good AfD candidates, never mind CSD, despite the rabid imaginings of some. Phil | Talk 10:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete to discourage speedy deletes out of process. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 14:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, just because Misplaced Pages is the only place where people can openly contradict their actions and not get stuff thrown at them. Also, it's bad for the environment. Cernen 10:49, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Stars

Adds an extra three levels of metatemplate cruft to album infoboxes, solely to add alt text to an image (which is already there in many cases, sometimes in superior form). If the alt text is that important, it can be added by a bot. —Cryptic (talk) 06:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. I'm all for getting the proper alt-text but this is not the way (bot?). Using the switch and the template is a needless waste of resources. This template is not likely to change... we are not likely going to get new stars (if we did we'd just change the image anyways) so I see no use to this template. gren グレン 06:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Very strong KEEP!. I've seen this start to be flowed onto Album infoboxes. All it is, is an easier way to flow ratings from AllMusic.com and elsewhere into the infobox. Never throw oout something useful, it would be like replacing the hatch on a submarine with a screen door, or replacing the healthy food in your fridge with junk food. --Cjmarsicano 06:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It doesn't actually make it easier; it just makes people have to learn a new syntax. Here's what happens when someone tries to figure it out by trial and error. Alt text is useful. Crippling the servers is not. (And for the user who helpfully moved the tfd notice from the talk page, note that the template has been placed into some 1600 articles (almost all of them by User:ScudLee), all of whose caches you just broke.) —Cryptic (talk) 06:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Not a problem, glad to help make sure this TfD receives a fair "trial". Next time, please don't try to hide the fact that you're nominating a template for deletion by placing the notice only on the talk page. —Locke Cole 08:45, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
      • Nobody was trying to hide anything; thanks for your assumption of good faith. Its far-and-away most-frequent user is presumeably watching the talk page (since he created it), and it was noted on Template talk:Album infobox, which will be watched by anyone at all likely to use it. The notice was placed on the talk page because editing a template used on as many pages as this one is will fully occupy the servers for about ten seconds (see WP:AUM). —Cryptic (talk) 09:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
        • I was just returning the favor for your assumption of good faith on my part. My concern isn't with server load, it's with ensuring this TfD nomination has a chance to be heard fairly. I'm aware of WP:AUM, I'm also aware that many people don't keep frequently used templates on their watchlist. It makes sense that these people should be notified. —Locke Cole 09:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Strong delete, please spare our servers the torture, and help fix it instead. Titoxd 06:54, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Abstain for now. In terms of usability, it seems much easier to me, especially the way you type for a half star: {{stars|2.5}} instead of ], which always felt very unintuitive. Very few people bother with typing alternate text, because editing gets done by imitation (for the most part) and no-one else is doing it. Imitation isn't that hard to master, so I'm not very moved by the argument that it is a burden to learn a handful of characters worth of syntax. I'm equally unmoved by the fact that "almost all of them by User:ScudLee" – he attempted to discuss the idea at Project albums talk page, no one objected or even responded really, and no-one else really bothered about the work as much as he did. However, if there is an extra burdon on servers then that's not good, but I can't really comment on that aspect because I wouldn't know what I'm talking about. Could we use subst: to get around this problem? Having read the talk page for the template, it's quite clear that subst will be much worse than just typing out ] --Qirex 08:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • By the way, shouldn't the TFD notice go on the template talk page so as not to screw up all those infoboxes?? See for example To the Extreme --Qirex 08:13, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
    • The only way some people will even know this template is up for deletion is if the notice is on the template itself (not the talk page). I moved it from the talk page so it would, hopefully, get a fair shake here at TfD.. (otherwise, it's possible it would get deleted without a proper debate). Yes it makes it ugly, but plenty of other templates face TfD and deal with the ugly factor; it's an effective means of informing editors that a template they might use is being considered for deletion. (Now if only IfD had a way of superimposing a notice over an image when it's up for deletion...) —Locke Cole 08:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Strong keep. The template is one of the best ideas that I've seen in a while, and yet you're considering it for deletion? --Andylkl 08:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It's a good idea to put horrible strain on the servers?--Sean|Black 08:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Switching to abstain for the time being then. --Andylkl 09:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not useful enough to justify the expense.--Sean|Black 08:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. (Creator). There is a secondary purpose to this template which I neglected to mention when I created it. My intention from the start was to replace the existing stars with images of my own. These images have a transparent interior, allowing the actual color of the stars to be decided by the background of a surrounding span tag. This is only really feasible if it is handled within a template. Because they have a different appearance to the current stars, I was going to do the switchover once I'd replaced all usages, to maintain consistency, that, perhaps, was a mistake. - Lee (talk) 10:16, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oh, and I'd also add that the first switch template will be eliminated by the new images, since their file names match the parameter. The second switch template can be removed by a simple rewording. - Lee (talk) 10:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I've uploaded Image:Transparent3.5of5.png as an example, and posted the potential Switch-less code on Template talk:Stars. - Lee (talk) 12:45, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete it's not just the template, but because it only works on 5 stars. If it were to work for 3/4 or 8/10 it would be a std approach to handling ratings. KittenKlub 10:21, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Largely on the strength of the strain on the servers, this becomes "Expense" which should be avoided, except for Real benefit. Tha's not quite the right way to put it, functionally this is a really good idea, but so is KittenKlub's (see last post). Personally the I believe the whole thing should be rethought and the issue of star ratings of different number base's included in the reworking. Ratings out of 10 are very common and should be allowed for, please come up with a more comprehensive solution (i.e. various start ratings) but with minimal server impact. Kevinalewis 10:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

  It would be fairly trivial to introduce a second parameter to handle the total number of stars without breaking current usage (it can default to 5). It would mean drawing even more images to handle all the cases, but other than that, that doesn't present a problem. - Lee (talk) 11:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

  If you can do all that and remove the need for the metatemplate you would provide the holy grain of star rating templates! Kevinalewis 11:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete It's easy enough to learn new syntax if it's for the good as far as the servers go. I'm a new user but would be happy to copy others' use of the new (or old) syntax. Crazyale 12:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep.—thegreentrilby 14:13, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Keep This info box is truely a good way to link to AMG, a standard music service. Makenji-san 14:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Um. Nobody's saying we should delete {{Album infobox}}. Or even get rid of the reviews section. Or even the images of stars. Just the template that, very inefficiently, puts the images there. —Cryptic (talk) 15:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as above, and per WP:AUM. Radiant_>|< 15:12, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator. --NormanEinstein 15:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Weak keep. Creator is working on a Switch-less version, and {{switch}} is in any case one of the lighter-weight If Templates. I just can't see this as the straw that would break the camel's back. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Notice: I have now eliminated the {{switch}} templates. This template no longer includes any other templates. Please consider revising your comments above to reflect the new situation. I have also remove the TfD notice from the template itself to minimize server load (can {{tfd}} be substed?). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:04, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - this is a change of vote - although not moving beyond the 5 star basis, this is now NOT a metatemplate. So arguements on that basis have lost all relevance to this template. Purhaps someone will generate the other base star ratings in time. Thanks—Ilmari Karonen - Kevinalewis 09:45, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
• Question: isn't it still effectively a metatemplate since it gets placed inside a template? Or, is it not a metatemplate now because it doesn't, itself, contain a template? --Qirex 01:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • It was never a meta-template, as described at WP:AUM (although it used to contain a couple). Meta-templates are templates used within another template, whilst Stars is used directly in articles. The fact that it's usually passed as a parameter in {{Album infobox}} is (AFAIK) neither here nor there. Edits to Stars don't, for example, automatically invalidate the cache of every page that contains Album infobox, just the ones with the stars template in them (like any other template). - Lee (talk) 13:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Holding cell

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

Tools

There are several tools that can help when implementing TfDs. Some of these are listed below.

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

Closing discussions

The closing procedures are outlined at Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Closing instructions.

To review

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

• Template:Infobox_tropical_cyclone2024 March 10 – Infobox_tropical_cyclone ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Infobox_storm2024 March 10 – Infobox_storm ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WikiProject_Glass2024 November 5 – WikiProject_Glass ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:PIE2024 December 3 – PIE ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Instances should be replaced with {{lang|ine-x-proto}}. If the instance contains a phrase or sentence, |proto=no should be added to suppress the asterisk. —Compassionate727  14:17, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

To merge

Templates to be merged into another template.

Infoboxes

• Merge into the singular {{infobox ship}} (currently a redirect):
  • Template:Infobox_ship_begin2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_begin ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_ship_career2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_career ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_ship_characteristics2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_characteristics ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_ship_class_overview2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_class_overview ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_ship_image2022 April 30 – Infobox_ship_image ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_service_record2022 April 30 – Infobox_service_record ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

    I have hacked Module:Infobox ship which implements ship infoboxen without the external wikitable that the above templates require. Uses Module:Infobox; {{infobox ship begin}} is no longer required; parameter names are changed from sentence- to snake-case; section header height for career, characteristics, service record sections is normalized; custom fields are supported. I chose to retain the individual section templates as subtemplates:

    • {{Infobox ship/image}}
    • {{Infobox ship/career}}
    • {{Infobox ship/characteristic}}
    • {{Infobox ship/class}}
    • {{Infobox ship/service record}} – Module:Infobox ship implements only the 'ship' portion of {{Infobox service record}}

    In the main infobox these subtemplates are called with the |section<n>= parameters (aliases of |data<n>=).

    Comparisons between wikitable infoboxen and Module:Infobox ship infoboxen can bee seen at my sandbox (permalink).

    —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

    Since the intent is to use Module:Infobox directly, why is Module:Infobox ship being used to generate the infobox? I can understand if there is need for a backend module to validate a value or something, but is there really a reason to have this unique code? Gonnym (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

    The original complaint was that the ship infoboxen templates are table templates masquerading as infobox templates. None of those templates use Module:Infobox. Module:Infobox ship answers that complaint. Yeah, we still have subtemplates, but, in my opinion, that is a good thing because the appropriate parameters and their data are contained in each particular subtemplate. The container subtemplates make it relatively easy for an editor reading an article's wikitext to understand. The current ship infobox system allows sections in any order (except for the position of {{infobox ship begin}} – not needed with Module:Infobox ship); whatever the final outcome of this mess, that facility must not be lost.

    Module:Infobox ship does do some error checking (synonymous parameters |ship_armor= / |ship_armour=, |ship_draft= / |ship_draught=, |ship_honors= / |ship_honours=, and |ship_stricken= / |ship_struck=). Whether {{infobox ship}} directly calls Module:Infobox or whether {{infobox ship}} calls Module:Infobox ship which then calls Module:Infobox is really immaterial so long as the final rendered result is a correctly formatted infobox.

    —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:06, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

    @Trappist the monk are you still interested in working on this Module? If not, I'd like to try to get it finished myself. The massive deviation I had in mind was to make one invocation of the module do everything. Each page will require individual attention to complete the merge into a proper infobox anyway, so I reason to go the extra mile to make it nicer in general. Repeatable parameters will have the normal n number appended to the end of the parameter. An alternative would be to have subboxes for repeating sections, which would be easier in general to replace and implement. SWinxy (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

    Sure, but I don't think that this page is the proper place to discuss. Choose some place more proper and let me know where that is?

    —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:58, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

• Replacement with {{Infobox aircraft}}:
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_type2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_type ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_career2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_career ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_program2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_program ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_begin2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_begin ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) → {{Infobox aircraft}}
  • Template:Infobox_aircraft_engine2023 January 22 – Infobox_aircraft_engine ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) → {{Infobox aircraft}}
    • For {{Infobox aircraft engine}}, There is an ongoing discussion about whether the aircraft engine Infobox should be merged with the Infobox aircraft or not. Except for the engine Infobox, other Infoboxes can be orphaned and there are no objection for that. Prarambh20 (talk) 22:39, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
      • This discussion is still ongoing, so I have moved it back to the "to merge" list with the others. Primefac (talk) 10:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
      • The discussion has now ended (diff), with the consensus NOT TO MERGE {{Infobox aircraft engine}} with the others. However {{infobox aircraft begin}} may or may not end up being merged into {{Infobox aircraft engine}}. The template pages should be updated accordingly. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 10:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
• Template:Infobox_climber2024 June 29 – Infobox_climber ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Infobox_mountaineer2024 June 29 – Infobox_mountaineer ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Merge into {{Infobox NFL biography}} and rename to {{Infobox gridiron football biography}}
  • Template:Infobox_Canadian_Football_League_biography2024 November 18 – Infobox_Canadian_Football_League_biography ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_NFL_biography2024 November 18 – Infobox_NFL_biography ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Infobox_gridiron_football_person2024 November 18 – Infobox_gridiron_football_person ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

Navigation templates

• None currently

Link templates

• Template:Lx2023 October 1 – Lx ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Pagelinks2023 October 1 – Pagelinks ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Because Lx has the option to hide certain links and PageLinks itself doesn't, a direct merge is impossible. The next best thing would be to convert the transclusions to invocations of Module:PageLinks. Doesn't look too impossible at first glance. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 00:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

    Problem: Lx's 20,000 transclusions are kinda fake, because almost all of them are transclusions of transclusions.
    Even if we restrict it to the template namespace, most of those are transclusions of transclusions of transclusions in the doc subpage. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 00:38, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

    The more I look at this, the more it appears technically infeasible. Lx has some really bizarre arguments like tag and label which can't be replicated by Module:PageLinks. When Lx was used to link to a normal page, namespace is usually Talk and label is usually talk, but when it's used to link to a talk page, either could be anything. Also, the recursive transclusion issue means the only way to get our pages would be an insource search, which means we'd also have to deal with pages like this.Replacing all uses of the format \{\{x\|1=\|2=(.*)\|3=Talk\|4=talk\}\} with {{Pagelinks|$1}} could be a start. From there, I'm totally lost. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 16:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

    What if we only replaced uses matching an insource search in the template namespace, and then substed everything else? Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 19:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

• Template:See_also_if_exists2024 December 13 – See_also_if_exists ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:See_also2024 December 13 – See_also ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

Other

• Template:Football_squad_player22020 February 1 – Football_squad_player2 ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) and Template:Football_squad_player2020 February 1 – Football_squad_player ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Note Pending Redesign RfC robertsky (talk) 18:51, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
    • I've closed the RfC. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 15:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
  • At this point this is ready for large scale replacement. I said a while ago that I could do it but due to me being quite busy IRL this seems unlikely to get done in a timely manner. If you feel like doing a large scale replacement job feel free to take this one. --Trialpears (talk) 17:34, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Trialpears, what large-scale replacement? I (foolishly?) jumped into this rabbit hole, and have been in it for over a day now. This is a very complex merge; I've got the documentation diff to show fewer differences, but there's still more to be done. – wbm1058 (talk) 15:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
• Template:Auto_compact_TOC2023 March 6 – Auto_compact_TOC ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Compact_TOC2023 March 6 – Compact_TOC ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Wikisource author2023 July 5 – Wikisource author ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Wikisourcelang2023 July 5 – Wikisourcelang ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Hi now that {{Wikisourcelang}} is being merged, how do I use the merge target template to point to sister language Wikisources? All the links keep incorrectly pointing to the English version and the documentation of {{Wikisource}} has not been updated about this. Folly Mox (talk) 20:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
    • Folly Mox, the merge has not yet been completed, so you should use the appropriate currently-existing template to do whatever it is you are planning until the merge is complete. The existing uses will be converted appropriately at that time. Primefac (talk) 09:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
      • Oops, I forgot I had posted here. My assertion was incorrectly based on the first instance I had tested, which had been misusing parameters in such a way that it worked prior to the start of the merge process but not afterwards. The links to en.s/lang:page do properly redirect if the parameters are used correctly, but I didn't initially follow the links to check. It was quite an embarrassing hour or so of my contribution history. Folly Mox (talk) 13:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
• Template:Wikisourcehas2023 July 5 – Wikisourcehas ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • I see I am not supposed to use {{Wikisourcehas}} on "additional padverages" so I have had to move to using {{Sister project}} because {{Wikisource}} does not have the required functionality. I shall look out for further developments because some very clever coding will be needed. Thincat (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
  • For over a year now we have been instructed not to use {{Wikisource author}}, {{Wikisourcelang}} and {{Wikisourcehas}} and this is a nuisance because avoiding their use is not at all trivial. Can we have a report on progress with the merge, please, or permission to again use these templates? Thincat (talk) 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
    • See Primefac's note above. Just keep using the existing templates. They will be converted for you during the merge process, whenever it happens (these merges sometimes take a while, as you can see above). When the conversion is done, the merged template will support the features that you need. That's how it's supposed to work, anyway. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

      Thank you. That's helpful. Is there a change that could be usefully made to the display text in {{being deleted}}? Or maybe the assumption is that no one reads beyond the first line anyway. Thincat (talk) 20:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

• Template:Facebook_page2024 February 21 – Facebook_page ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Facebook2024 February 21 – Facebook ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • While the result was "merge" it seems that this should be moved to "convert" as looking at Craig Kilborn, the ID used there is "The-Kilborn-File/107748632605752", while the new one is at https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100082874612029. The number is different. Unless I'm missing something else there is nothing here to merge. --Gonnym (talk) 10:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
• Template:R_fully_protected2024 September 17 – R_fully_protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:R_template-protected2024 September 17 – R_template-protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:R_extended-protected2024 September 17 – R_extended-protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:R_semi-protected2024 September 17 – R_semi-protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:R_protected2024 September 17 – R_protected ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:AfD_new_user2024 October 18 – AfD_new_user ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:At_school_occasional2024 November 22 – At_school_occasional ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:At_school2024 November 22 – At_school ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Cricket_Result2024 December 6 – Cricket_Result ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Cricket_result2024 December 6 – Cricket_result ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:STN2024 December 6 – STN ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Station2024 December 6 – Station ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Incomprehensible2024 December 13 – Incomprehensible ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Confusing2024 December 13 – Confusing ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Plural_form2024 December 4 – Plural_form ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Plural_abbr2024 December 4 – Plural_abbr ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WPBASEBALL_assessment_level_category2024 December 8 – WPBASEBALL_assessment_level_category ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WPANIMATION_assessment_quality_work_group_level2024 December 8 – WPANIMATION_assessment_quality_work_group_level ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WikiProject_Television_task_force_assessment_category2024 December 8 – WikiProject_Television_task_force_assessment_category ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:WPANIMATION_assessment_quality_work_group_level2024 December 8 – WPANIMATION_assessment_quality_work_group_level ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:How-to2024 December 3 – How-to ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) merge {{manual}} into this template
• Template:Manual2024 December 3 – Manual ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) merge into {{how-to}}

Meta

• None currently

To convert

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

• 2023 October 25
  • Template:R to related2023 October 25 – R to related ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases ) - convert to {{R from related word}} or {{R to related topic}} as appropriate
  • Adding this from RfD as it's template related. --Gonnym (talk) 21:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

    Started toying with this and came to the conclusion that I was very the wrong person because there are definitely cases where the appropriate template is neither of the two of interest. We need to leave this refinement on the user talk pages of some people who know what they're doing. Izno (talk) 22:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

• Template:S-line/IT-Eurostar_left/Frecciabianca2024 April 25 – S-line/IT-Eurostar_left/Frecciabianca ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:S-line/IT-Eurostar_right/Frecciabianca2024 April 25 – S-line/IT-Eurostar_right/Frecciabianca ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Module:Adjacent_stations/Trenitalia2024 April 25 – Module:Adjacent_stations/Trenitalia ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:S-s2024 September 30 – S-s ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:Lang-crh32024 November 4 – Lang-crh3 ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

  perhaps convert to something like {{lang-sr-Latn-Cyrl}} which wraps {{lang-x2}}. Example using {{lang-x2}} as a mockup:

  Crimean Tatar: Bır Hacı Geray, بیر-حاجى كراى‎ ← {{lang-crh3|Bır Hacı Geray|بیر-حاجى كراى}}

  Crimean Tatar: Bır Hacı Geray, بیر-حاجى كراى ← {{lang-x2|crh|Bır Hacı Geray|script2=Arab|بیر-حاجى كراى}}

  —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:31, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Template:WikiProject_Buckethead_task_force2024 November 14 – WikiProject_Buckethead_task_force ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

  Merge target needs clarification. The target is a wrapper of biography, but the task force is under WikiProject Guitarists which uses Template:WikiProject Guitarists. --Gonnym (talk) 13:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

  My closing statement does not involve Musicians so as to avoid the wrapping issue. There was no consensus the last time around to merge into Guitarists and no indication in the latest TFD that the opinion had changed. Primefac (talk) 21:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

• Template:KWh2024 December 6 – KWh ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Replace with {{Political parties in the Netherlands}} and {{Defunct political parties in the Netherlands}} as appropriate:
  • Template:Liberal_political_parties_in_the_Netherlands2024 December 10 – Liberal_political_parties_in_the_Netherlands ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
  • Template:Socialist_parties_in_the_Netherlands2024 December 10 – Socialist_parties_in_the_Netherlands ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )
• Template:FCC_letter2024 December 16 – FCC_letter ( links | transclusions | talk | doc | sandbox | testcases )

  Sammi Brie, do existing transclusions need to be replaced with anything or is straight deletion suitable? (please do not ping on reply) Primefac (talk) 19:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  Manual conversion to citation templates or external links. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 21:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

To substitute

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

• None currently

To orphan

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

• None currently

Ready for deletion

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

• None currently