The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains two entries, one of which is a redirect to a list. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:51, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains one entry. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains two entries, one of which is a redirect to a list. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:38, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains two entries, both of which are redirects to a list. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:24, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:22, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains two entries, one of which is a redirect to a list. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 00:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 01:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:09, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Unused and unlikely to be used. It's easier to just link to the Commons category directly than use this template. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:33, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
|commons_category=
in the infobox, and also to arrange that the template would fetch data from Wikidata, when enabled. As soon as you fetch the name of the commons category from Wikidata (because there's no guarantee that it's the same as the page name), you need that unknown name twice. I believe it's cheaper to pass it as a parameter to a helper template which can use the passed parameter for both the link and the displayed text, than it is to call Wikidata twice for the same piece of information. Of course I stand to be corrected if that's not the case. --
RexxS (
talk) 20:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 01:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by PhilKnight ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
I created this template many years ago. It is not used, and not very useful. Given a place name in a format like "Seattle, Washington" it generates links to both the sub-region and overall region. For example: Seattle, Washington. I largely made this as an experiment to learn how to make a template. Bkwillwm ( talk) 21:23, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus ~ Rob13 Talk 09:59, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
unused and generally duplicates navigation found in other navboxes Frietjes ( talk) 16:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:59, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Delete speedy: It is unnecessary due to being a non-Olympian multi-sport event. Like this entry.
And more similar templates must be deleted:
And all templates included in this and this categories. JackHoang ( talk) 03:39, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 7 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 09:59, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Unused and outdated, see Airport Rail Link (Bangkok). Matthewmayer ( talk) 18:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 01:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft deletion. Nn94 14 indicates they wouldn't object if this was a valid rationale, and being a frequent closer of TfDs, I see multiple rationales available here that are regualarly applied. First, navboxes are usually considered not useful when they navigate between less than four existing articles, which applies to one of these. Second, there's quite a bit of precedent that being a part of international teams is only worth a navbox for major sports when the team wins a major competition (or, depending on the level of the competition, comes very close). WP:Template creep is usually applied at similar past discussions. ~ Rob13 Talk 10:02, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
6th and 4th place squads, not notable Frietjes ( talk) 16:17, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 01:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:15, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Only used in one article. Current convention for other MTR single-station diagrams is to have the RDT code within the article, like at
Kowloon Station (MTR).
Jc86035 (
talk) Use {{
re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 13:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Deleted per CSD G8 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Template where all the articles never existed or have been deleted by AfD. As such, no longer needed. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 10:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Deleted per CSD G8 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Template where all the articles never existed or have been deleted by AfD. As such, no longer needed. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 10:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
For whatever reason, these templates were created as mirrors to the "
Country flag IOC alias" templates. However, only 18 were created, and these 12 are duplicates of their IOC counterparts (and always have been). No need for duplicate items. I am wrapping the TFD notice with <noinclude>...</noinclude>
so as to not break almost 3k pages.
Primefac (
talk) 03:35, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains two entries, one of which is a redirect to a list. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:51, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains one entry. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains two entries, one of which is a redirect to a list. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:38, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:20, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains two entries, both of which are redirects to a list. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:24, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:22, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Template contains two entries, one of which is a redirect to a list. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 00:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 01:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:09, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Unused and unlikely to be used. It's easier to just link to the Commons category directly than use this template. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:33, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
|commons_category=
in the infobox, and also to arrange that the template would fetch data from Wikidata, when enabled. As soon as you fetch the name of the commons category from Wikidata (because there's no guarantee that it's the same as the page name), you need that unknown name twice. I believe it's cheaper to pass it as a parameter to a helper template which can use the passed parameter for both the link and the displayed text, than it is to call Wikidata twice for the same piece of information. Of course I stand to be corrected if that's not the case. --
RexxS (
talk) 20:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 01:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by PhilKnight ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
I created this template many years ago. It is not used, and not very useful. Given a place name in a format like "Seattle, Washington" it generates links to both the sub-region and overall region. For example: Seattle, Washington. I largely made this as an experiment to learn how to make a template. Bkwillwm ( talk) 21:23, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus ~ Rob13 Talk 09:59, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
unused and generally duplicates navigation found in other navboxes Frietjes ( talk) 16:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:59, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Delete speedy: It is unnecessary due to being a non-Olympian multi-sport event. Like this entry.
And more similar templates must be deleted:
And all templates included in this and this categories. JackHoang ( talk) 03:39, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 7 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 09:59, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Unused and outdated, see Airport Rail Link (Bangkok). Matthewmayer ( talk) 18:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 01:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft deletion. Nn94 14 indicates they wouldn't object if this was a valid rationale, and being a frequent closer of TfDs, I see multiple rationales available here that are regualarly applied. First, navboxes are usually considered not useful when they navigate between less than four existing articles, which applies to one of these. Second, there's quite a bit of precedent that being a part of international teams is only worth a navbox for major sports when the team wins a major competition (or, depending on the level of the competition, comes very close). WP:Template creep is usually applied at similar past discussions. ~ Rob13 Talk 10:02, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
6th and 4th place squads, not notable Frietjes ( talk) 16:17, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 9 (non-admin closure) Primefac ( talk) 01:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:15, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Only used in one article. Current convention for other MTR single-station diagrams is to have the RDT code within the article, like at
Kowloon Station (MTR).
Jc86035 (
talk) Use {{
re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 13:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Deleted per CSD G8 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Template where all the articles never existed or have been deleted by AfD. As such, no longer needed. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 10:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Deleted per CSD G8 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:12, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Template where all the articles never existed or have been deleted by AfD. As such, no longer needed. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 10:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
For whatever reason, these templates were created as mirrors to the "
Country flag IOC alias" templates. However, only 18 were created, and these 12 are duplicates of their IOC counterparts (and always have been). No need for duplicate items. I am wrapping the TFD notice with <noinclude>...</noinclude>
so as to not break almost 3k pages.
Primefac (
talk) 03:35, 27 November 2016 (UTC)