The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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.
Izno (
talk) 05:27, 3 January 2023 (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(s) or module(s) 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).
Single-use article-content templates that should be substed into the only article that uses them. Having these as templates just makes the content more difficult to edit. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 19:45, 26 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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).
This is a monstrosity and helps navigation for no-one. Each of these subtemplates is reasonable on the articles pertaining to that company/series, but this giant template is unreasonable on others and does not aid in navigating between articles the reader might be interested in.
Izno (
talk) 17:24, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per Izno. When I created that template 12 years ago, there was only a handful of devices. Android's popularity has made this template useless. Regards
SoWhy 17:33, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete: I thought I was looking at a template big enough to be difficult to navigate. Then I saw that all of the subsections were collapsed. If someone wants to take the subsections and split them into reasonably-sized templates, go ahead. But something of this size is well past usefulness. As a final nail in the coffin, many entries
are red links.
HouseBlastertalk 06:46, 27 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete Per nomination.
Hajoon0102💬 00:23, 31 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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).
Unused. There is no article called
NAPK and the flag image (
File:N.P.K._Flag.png) was removed from the template as non-free (it is not used anywhere else, either), so I doubt this template can be used at all.
V27t (
talk) 12:57, 26 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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 – Useful template that has been split from page so as to not overload page size.
United States Man (
talk) 05:56, 13 December 2022 (UTC)reply
The size count in the page history is irrelevant to whether a template should exist or not.
Izno (
talk) 21:05, 29 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Do you even know what the template is for?
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 00:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
I linked to the relevant template namespace page which has guidelines on it and am a regular here, including closing discussions, and have
over 13 thousand template and module namespace edits, combined. There's another 3,300 in template talk and module talk namespaces, and about 1,400 edits to
Help talk:CS1 as a significant non-template-named namespace dealing predominantly in templates, for a total of about 16,700 edits dealing with templates, which is about 20% of my total edits here. And about 80% of your total edits here.
I suspect I have some idea of what their purpose is. It's not to "make page size smaller" but instead to allow re-use of common wikitext. That's why templates not used very often are nominated for deletion. It says so in the very first sentence of the page linked below: The Template namespace on Wikipedia is used to store templates, which contain Wiki markup intended for inclusion on multiple pages, usually via transclusion.Izno (
talk) 01:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
No no no. I meant THIS template, not the thousands you've been through. Just THIS one.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
It's a map. Says it in the name. :)
Izno (
talk) 04:15, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Why do you think that's relevant? I'm not interested in playing 20 questions with how
incivil you're being.
Izno (
talk) 04:19, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Hmmmmmm...? I just wanted to bring more relevant people to the conversation. This is our weather project you know; I think we should all have a say. :)
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Oh wait. I just saw the comment below...whoops. I feel stupid now.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 00:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 09:49, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep – I literally see no issue with it. The notion that is should be deleted because "its only on one page" is ridiculous since most templates are on only one page anyway.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 20:43, 29 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Sooooooooooo...which guideline does it break?
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 00:19, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Templates that violate the guidelines on this page, have poorly defined function, are redundant, become orphaned or used on only one page, or violate any Wikipedia policies may be nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion. Emphasis mine.
Izno (
talk) 01:32, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
...again, which guideline does it break? Its not any of those things except being used on one page, which is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of since we've used templates like this for multiple tornado outbreaks in the past. It shows touchdown points for all the tornadoes. Its useful for people who don't want to go through the table and wonder where the heck all these tornadoes were. To delete a template because its "only on one page" when it vastly improves the 1 page its on is dumb. Look at it first please.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Ok, now I get it. You seem to misunderstand the point of TFD in general. Sometimes, we delete templates and remove them entirely. More often with templates like this one, we subst them, as has been suggested by WikiCleanerMan, such that their content remains in the article and only the template page itself is removed. If you would like to retain the content, substing it and deleting the template is called for here.
Izno (
talk) 04:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
...oh. I feel stupid now. Sorry its been a long day.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:46, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep – The template appears to be very useful for the article it's for.--
Halls4521 (
talk) 02:11, 31 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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.
Izno (
talk) 17:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)reply
A long-outdated ice hockey team roster, I deleted the only use on an article, but wanted to bring it here before outright deleting.
Kaiser matias (
talk) 08:12, 26 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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(s) or module(s) 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).
A5
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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.
Izno (
talk) 02:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Cleaning up now-useless templates related to the
A5 speedy deletion criterion following its repeal.
* Pppery *it has begun... 02:26, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per
previousdiscussions. I get the historical value argument, so no prejudice against moving (without redirects) to a "museum" of sorts alongside the other ex-CSDs (e.g. to subpages of
WP:Criteria for speedy deletion) in the future. But I strongly agree with the "red tells you there is a problem" argument—these links should turn red.
HouseBlastertalk 02:36, 27 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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.
Izno (
talk) 05:27, 3 January 2023 (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(s) or module(s) 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).
Single-use article-content templates that should be substed into the only article that uses them. Having these as templates just makes the content more difficult to edit. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 19:45, 26 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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).
This is a monstrosity and helps navigation for no-one. Each of these subtemplates is reasonable on the articles pertaining to that company/series, but this giant template is unreasonable on others and does not aid in navigating between articles the reader might be interested in.
Izno (
talk) 17:24, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per Izno. When I created that template 12 years ago, there was only a handful of devices. Android's popularity has made this template useless. Regards
SoWhy 17:33, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete: I thought I was looking at a template big enough to be difficult to navigate. Then I saw that all of the subsections were collapsed. If someone wants to take the subsections and split them into reasonably-sized templates, go ahead. But something of this size is well past usefulness. As a final nail in the coffin, many entries
are red links.
HouseBlastertalk 06:46, 27 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete Per nomination.
Hajoon0102💬 00:23, 31 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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).
Unused. There is no article called
NAPK and the flag image (
File:N.P.K._Flag.png) was removed from the template as non-free (it is not used anywhere else, either), so I doubt this template can be used at all.
V27t (
talk) 12:57, 26 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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 – Useful template that has been split from page so as to not overload page size.
United States Man (
talk) 05:56, 13 December 2022 (UTC)reply
The size count in the page history is irrelevant to whether a template should exist or not.
Izno (
talk) 21:05, 29 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Do you even know what the template is for?
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 00:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
I linked to the relevant template namespace page which has guidelines on it and am a regular here, including closing discussions, and have
over 13 thousand template and module namespace edits, combined. There's another 3,300 in template talk and module talk namespaces, and about 1,400 edits to
Help talk:CS1 as a significant non-template-named namespace dealing predominantly in templates, for a total of about 16,700 edits dealing with templates, which is about 20% of my total edits here. And about 80% of your total edits here.
I suspect I have some idea of what their purpose is. It's not to "make page size smaller" but instead to allow re-use of common wikitext. That's why templates not used very often are nominated for deletion. It says so in the very first sentence of the page linked below: The Template namespace on Wikipedia is used to store templates, which contain Wiki markup intended for inclusion on multiple pages, usually via transclusion.Izno (
talk) 01:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
No no no. I meant THIS template, not the thousands you've been through. Just THIS one.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
It's a map. Says it in the name. :)
Izno (
talk) 04:15, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Why do you think that's relevant? I'm not interested in playing 20 questions with how
incivil you're being.
Izno (
talk) 04:19, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Hmmmmmm...? I just wanted to bring more relevant people to the conversation. This is our weather project you know; I think we should all have a say. :)
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Oh wait. I just saw the comment below...whoops. I feel stupid now.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 00:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 09:49, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep – I literally see no issue with it. The notion that is should be deleted because "its only on one page" is ridiculous since most templates are on only one page anyway.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 20:43, 29 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Sooooooooooo...which guideline does it break?
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 00:19, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Templates that violate the guidelines on this page, have poorly defined function, are redundant, become orphaned or used on only one page, or violate any Wikipedia policies may be nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion. Emphasis mine.
Izno (
talk) 01:32, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
...again, which guideline does it break? Its not any of those things except being used on one page, which is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of since we've used templates like this for multiple tornado outbreaks in the past. It shows touchdown points for all the tornadoes. Its useful for people who don't want to go through the table and wonder where the heck all these tornadoes were. To delete a template because its "only on one page" when it vastly improves the 1 page its on is dumb. Look at it first please.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Ok, now I get it. You seem to misunderstand the point of TFD in general. Sometimes, we delete templates and remove them entirely. More often with templates like this one, we subst them, as has been suggested by WikiCleanerMan, such that their content remains in the article and only the template page itself is removed. If you would like to retain the content, substing it and deleting the template is called for here.
Izno (
talk) 04:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
...oh. I feel stupid now. Sorry its been a long day.
ChessEric (
talk·contribs) 04:46, 30 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep – The template appears to be very useful for the article it's for.--
Halls4521 (
talk) 02:11, 31 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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.
Izno (
talk) 17:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)reply
A long-outdated ice hockey team roster, I deleted the only use on an article, but wanted to bring it here before outright deleting.
Kaiser matias (
talk) 08:12, 26 December 2022 (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(s) or module(s) 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(s) or module(s) 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).
A5
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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.
Izno (
talk) 02:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Cleaning up now-useless templates related to the
A5 speedy deletion criterion following its repeal.
* Pppery *it has begun... 02:26, 26 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per
previousdiscussions. I get the historical value argument, so no prejudice against moving (without redirects) to a "museum" of sorts alongside the other ex-CSDs (e.g. to subpages of
WP:Criteria for speedy deletion) in the future. But I strongly agree with the "red tells you there is a problem" argument—these links should turn red.
HouseBlastertalk 02:36, 27 December 2022 (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).