The result of the discussion was delete after merging with the articles per this and prior discussions (e.g., the 16 May 2017 discussion). Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:05, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
single-use template, can be merged with the article; there is no need for a separate template. Frietjes ( talk) 21:47, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete by User:CactusWriter. SporkBot ( talk) 23:12, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Definitely non-encyclopedic. I'm sorry, but this isn't encyclopedic and doesn't meet Wikipedia's basic guidelines. J 947( c) 18:50, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Would like other eyes on this one – is there enough in this navbox to justify keeping it?... -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 16:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2017 May 24. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was merge with Template:Doctor Who companions Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
This is an un-used template that is a duplicate to the already-existing and well-used Template:Doctor Who companions. The template is also out of date, and the current template has been sufficient for years. The nominated template also cannot be used to separate between the companions of each Doctor, as the articles are currently set up as; the latter template allows for both a full view, and keeping the templates separate. If other additions needed to be added from other media (e.g. comics, audio, novels, etc.), then they can easily be added to the individual templates. -- Alex TW 12:39, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete after merging with the articles per this and prior discussions (e.g., the 16 May 2017 discussion). Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:05, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
single-use template, can be merged with the article; there is no need for a separate template. Frietjes ( talk) 21:47, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete by User:CactusWriter. SporkBot ( talk) 23:12, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Definitely non-encyclopedic. I'm sorry, but this isn't encyclopedic and doesn't meet Wikipedia's basic guidelines. J 947( c) 18:50, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Would like other eyes on this one – is there enough in this navbox to justify keeping it?... -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 16:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2017 May 24. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was merge with Template:Doctor Who companions Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
This is an un-used template that is a duplicate to the already-existing and well-used Template:Doctor Who companions. The template is also out of date, and the current template has been sufficient for years. The nominated template also cannot be used to separate between the companions of each Doctor, as the articles are currently set up as; the latter template allows for both a full view, and keeping the templates separate. If other additions needed to be added from other media (e.g. comics, audio, novels, etc.), then they can easily be added to the individual templates. -- Alex TW 12:39, 17 May 2017 (UTC)