The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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).
Delete. Another case where someone creates something, decides it's the wrong title and creates another one immediately afterwards. Unused.
Nigej (
talk) 16:25, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom and Nigej.--
Tom (LT) (
talk) 01:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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. —
RHaworth (
talk·contribs) 15:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
- The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines:
Not clearly documented as to its usage and scope.
Substantially duplicates or hardcodes the same functionality of established templates.
Has poorly-defined function, are redundant, become orphaned or used on only one page.
- The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
- The template is not used and has no likelihood of being used. -- Flooded with them hundreds 09:38, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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. —
JJMC89 (
T·C) 04:05, 24 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete as template creator; a better solution has been implemented. -- /
Alex/
21 10:09, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom.--
Tom (LT) (
talk) 01:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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).
Keep. Superficially it does seem potentially useful for navigation, say to get from the series 9 page to the series 3.page.
Nigej (
talk) 16:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep per Nigej. This template potentially is useful for navigation--
Tom (LT) (
talk) 01:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep per above. Certainly meets the "rule of five" of
WP:NENAN. -- /
Alex/
21 03:27, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep per Nigej's comments. The template is useful.
Soaper1234 -
talk 19:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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 above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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).
Delete. Another case where someone creates something, decides it's the wrong title and creates another one immediately afterwards. Unused.
Nigej (
talk) 16:25, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom and Nigej.--
Tom (LT) (
talk) 01:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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. —
RHaworth (
talk·contribs) 15:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
- The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines:
Not clearly documented as to its usage and scope.
Substantially duplicates or hardcodes the same functionality of established templates.
Has poorly-defined function, are redundant, become orphaned or used on only one page.
- The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
- The template is not used and has no likelihood of being used. -- Flooded with them hundreds 09:38, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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. —
JJMC89 (
T·C) 04:05, 24 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete as template creator; a better solution has been implemented. -- /
Alex/
21 10:09, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom.--
Tom (LT) (
talk) 01:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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).
Keep. Superficially it does seem potentially useful for navigation, say to get from the series 9 page to the series 3.page.
Nigej (
talk) 16:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep per Nigej. This template potentially is useful for navigation--
Tom (LT) (
talk) 01:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep per above. Certainly meets the "rule of five" of
WP:NENAN. -- /
Alex/
21 03:27, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep per Nigej's comments. The template is useful.
Soaper1234 -
talk 19:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).