The result of the discussion was keep but rewrite. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC) Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
This template tries to do too much, and is far too busy to be useful. DrKiernan ( talk) 18:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete per consensus and redundant to {{ coloured dates}} Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:43, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
If these were fundamentally related subjects then this would be a useful navigation tool, but they're disambiguation pages. The correct place for potentially interesting but tangential links is the see also section, not a navbox. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 14:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 23:27, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
old Firefox template with only one transclusion, suspended by/redundant to {{ Mozilla}}, {{ Firefox TOC}}, and {{ web browsers}}. mabdul 13:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Seldom-used template which does the same thing as {{ anchor}} only in a different way, presumably because someone could. {{ Anchor}} is both massively more prevalent and more capable (as it accepts multiple arguments). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:54, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
|2=
), much like {{
Visible anchor}}. Is it possible to determine on which pages Section is used that way? --
Michael Bednarek (
talk)
13:43, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
{{visible anchor}}
, except it can only produce one anchor instead of up to ten. —
Bility (
talk)
18:22, 25 April 2012 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
An alternative for plain HTML comment markup which hacks the parser (the comment is used as an argument to {{ null}}, which does nothing). There is no reason that HTML comment markup cannot be used directly, and this is massively more prevalent. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
WP:NENAN Night of the Big Wind talk 22:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
WP:NENAN. Only has four links and is trancluded to two articles. I just don't think it needs a navbox quite yet. Purplewowies ( talk) 19:13, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a TV guide 91.10.46.102 ( talk) 12:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep but rewrite. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC) Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
This template tries to do too much, and is far too busy to be useful. DrKiernan ( talk) 18:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete per consensus and redundant to {{ coloured dates}} Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:43, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
If these were fundamentally related subjects then this would be a useful navigation tool, but they're disambiguation pages. The correct place for potentially interesting but tangential links is the see also section, not a navbox. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 14:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 23:27, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
old Firefox template with only one transclusion, suspended by/redundant to {{ Mozilla}}, {{ Firefox TOC}}, and {{ web browsers}}. mabdul 13:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Seldom-used template which does the same thing as {{ anchor}} only in a different way, presumably because someone could. {{ Anchor}} is both massively more prevalent and more capable (as it accepts multiple arguments). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:54, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
|2=
), much like {{
Visible anchor}}. Is it possible to determine on which pages Section is used that way? --
Michael Bednarek (
talk)
13:43, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
{{visible anchor}}
, except it can only produce one anchor instead of up to ten. —
Bility (
talk)
18:22, 25 April 2012 (UTC)The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
An alternative for plain HTML comment markup which hacks the parser (the comment is used as an argument to {{ null}}, which does nothing). There is no reason that HTML comment markup cannot be used directly, and this is massively more prevalent. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 10:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
WP:NENAN Night of the Big Wind talk 22:10, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
WP:NENAN. Only has four links and is trancluded to two articles. I just don't think it needs a navbox quite yet. Purplewowies ( talk) 19:13, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a TV guide 91.10.46.102 ( talk) 12:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)