Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 August 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< August 25
August 27 >

August 26

[edit]

Template:Talkown

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:26, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pure junk - basically a talk page notice complaining about article stewardship/current consensus and or for use by those that simply aren't getting their way. Recently created by a new user unhappy with a talk page discussion. Moxy🍁 22:53, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:35, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no use-cases waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:03, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:DYK count topicon

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:48, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Used on only one user page. It might have general utility but it's been over a decade with only the one use. Izno (talk) 21:47, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unused waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:04, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Saturday Evening Post

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 16:10, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just three articles, no main article to explain what the subject is. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 15:30, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete articles should be wikilinked in body text, no need for beefy navbox with every pageload waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:05, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Index to chemical element pages/group pages inline

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:27, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No transclusions of this subpage. No incoming links or documentation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:07, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant to existing periodic table templates. Frank(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion) 05:04, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Couldn't this have been tagged speedy under T5: Unused template subpages? waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:08, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Rfcquote

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was keep. ✗plicit 14:28, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever the original purpose of this template is, it appears to have been left behind, and in some cases actively replaced by something else. The talk page has discussions about the failure of this template to work properly in some situations, which may be why it has been reduced from a reported 300 transclusions to just 50. I think that merging this template into {{blockquote}} or a similar template would reduce maintenance burden. I welcome input that helps me understand why this template exists and how it was intended to be different from our more widely used quotation templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:17, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong keep This template is used by Legobot (talk · contribs) to build the RfC listing pages, such as Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies, so the number of transclusions will vary according to (a) the number of open WP:RFCs and (b) the number of RfC categories that an open RfC has been placed in.
    On a technical note, before proposing a change to how the RfC listings operate, you must ensure that Legoktm (talk · contribs) is willing to amend the bot's code (past experience suggests that only "unbreak now!" amendments will be considered).
    @Jonesey95: You state in some cases actively replaced by something else - where has this occurred? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:51, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    As far as I can tell, it seems to be redundant to {{Blockquote}}. I tested it here, and Template:Blockquote seemed to work fine. Again, I could be wrong. What features of this template make it unique such that turning it into a redirect will break it, or the bot's process? As for quoting me, the complete quote would have been ... it appears to have been left behind, and in some cases actively replaced by something else. I said "appears" because the template has gone from a reported 300 transclusions to 50 transclusions. There may be another reason for this drastic reduction. Do you have any response to my request for input above? Why does the template exist, and how is it intended to be different from {{blockquote}} or a similar template? – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:42, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't create Legobot, I don't know its history, I am not fully familiar with its technical functions, nor do I operate it. But I do know that the bot uses the template and that recoding the bot is not a light matter. I have observed the bot maintaining the RfC listings for several years, and have seen two or three attempts to alter the templates that the bot uses. which have resulted in widespread difficulties that were only resolved by putting the templates back to how they were. In short: WP:AINTBROKE. As for the variable number of transclusions - RfCs are started, and after a while, they end. That's the idea - no RfC should be allowed to progress indefinitely. If there's been a general trend downward in the transclusion count, perhaps fewer RfCs are being raised, or perhaps somebody's been cleaning up misuses such as this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:42, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep Legobot is reliant on it, per Redrose64 there have been previous failed attempts to replace the template, all failed. Coleisforeditor (talk) 21:02, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as bot reliant, changed use of <block quote>...</block quote> to {{block indent}} per MOS:BLOCKQUOTE. To ensure screen reader isn't flooded with unnecessary semantics. Accessibility semantics are the CSS for readers with visual impairment, messing with their CSS is like messing with ours and adding lots of color and bold where it's not necessary :-) waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:14, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Transjakarta infobox

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:28, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary new station infobox. Usages in articles previously used {{Infobox station}}. If there were missing parameters that were needed, they should have been proposed on that template's talk page. Restore previous article usages, delete template without merging anything. Any merger proposal should be first proposed on the talk page. Gonnym (talk) 08:32, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may proceed with the deletion now. Thanks. Mtlh01p (talk) 07:00, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:CRC87

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:28, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused citation template. Gonnym (talk) 08:28, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unused waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:UEFA Women's Europa Cup winners

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:31, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quite literally unpopulated, and would remain so until May next year. It also wouldn't have a population of wikilinks large enough to even justify a navbox for at least five to ten years. — AFC Vixen 🦊 07:05, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Rotten readability. Not enough (i.e. zero) links to warrant a navigation template. The Banner talk 11:35, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:OlympicsQualificationCaveat

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:32, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This ambox is not a good ambox. Amboxes are about page issues, not for talking to the reader, which we should avoid anyway. Any article which generally refuses to include the full set of rules (which is fine since our objective is to summarize external sources) should cover the important ones and leave the rest to the reader via further reading or external links. IznoPublic (talk) 04:41, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the purpose of this template? The Banner talk 13:25, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:17, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:SET Index 100

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 16:10, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No separate article for this index. And the existing SET50 Index and SET100 Index does not say anything about the Set100 Index. The Banner talk 02:56, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep well populated, article links helpful, only err on the side that the main article lists all these wikilinks anyway waddie96 ★ (talk) 10:18, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, the main article mentions none of the names listed in this template as that is dedicated to the SET50 Index with just a few words for the SET100. The Banner talk 11:56, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_August_26&oldid=1309243334"