The result of the discussion was delete after substituting. ~ Rob13 Talk 05:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
These templates simply take text off the page. This year of templates is complete; the information is static and will not change (since it's clearly not 2005 any more). The templates are transcluded on no more than two pages each, so I see no reason why they shouldn't just be subst'd and deleted. Primefac ( talk) 03:19, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 06:03, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Only used on 2 category talk pages, where it can be substed. KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 23:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 06:03, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Unused. KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 23:19, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete per author. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:33, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
interesting, but currently unused, so I am guessing it's not needed Frietjes ( talk) 22:41, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:16, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
unused in articles. if we are going to deploy this, we should really refactor it to use LUA to avoid the template-based looping. Frietjes ( talk) 22:40, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
That said, every modern notable pro (and many top am) pool and carom billiards (but not snooker) players have profiles at AZBilliards, and it is one of the top three professionally edited non-snooker cue sports publications, along with Billiards Digest and Pool & Billiard Magazine, which also have websites with player profiles. What we might want to do is create player infobox parameters for these profile pages (which are regularly updated with tournament stats and such, for living players). This would be similar in effect and purpose to links to different organizations' breed standards in infoboxes like {{ Infobox dog breed}}, and OMIM (etc.) medical codes in {{ Infobox disease}}. It would consolidate the templating of "just the facts" external resources into one place in the WP site code. A maintenance problem with these profile links is that the sites' databases and the URLs that address them change over time, and if people are manually adding links to them in the ext. links section (or otherwise in some non-programmatic fashion), this will result in potentially thousands of dead links that have to be manually updated. So, while this particular template is basically dead, we'll need to template something like this somewhere at some point. I don't have time to adapt it right now, so go ahead and delete this broken one. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 08:42, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 06:43, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 22:25, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, and we generally don't navigate by a venue's use if it has multiple uses Frietjes ( talk) 22:22, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and all red links Frietjes ( talk) 22:21, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused. seems like it could be useful, but given the age and lack of transclusions, it seems it didn't catch on? Frietjes ( talk) 22:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. There's consensus against keeping this. A redirect may be plausible, but since the template is not currently in use, there isn't an obvious need for one. No prejudice against any editor boldly creating the redirect if they believe it will be used. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:49, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and generally duplicates navigation found in Template:Music production Frietjes ( talk) 22:19, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
single use and generally duplicates navigation provided by Template:Amphoe Buriram. Frietjes ( talk) 15:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:51, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused. we can always add more features to the other box-header templates if needed. Frietjes ( talk) 21:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:52, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and redundant to Template:Commons Frietjes ( talk) 21:18, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:52, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and duplicates navigation found in Template:Sleep Frietjes ( talk) 21:14, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:52, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 21:13, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, and if necessary, we could add more links to Template:Military of Egypt Frietjes ( talk) 21:12, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. A redirect would be misleading because the target template is not a navigation bar. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:55, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and duplicates Template:Brand Management. we don't need more than one of these. Frietjes ( talk) 21:11, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete per author approval Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:51, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
unused and, as far as I can tell, there are no categories which match this pattern Frietjes ( talk) 21:10, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:55, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and generally duplicates Template:Brazil national football team matches Frietjes ( talk) 21:08, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:55, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and out-of-date Frietjes ( talk) 21:07, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:55, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
very few core links. unused. Frietjes ( talk) 21:06, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete per author approval Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 21:05, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:57, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and no decade categories for this subject, so no need for the template Frietjes ( talk) 21:04, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:57, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and redundant to a simple portal link Frietjes ( talk) 21:01, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:57, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, and duplicates List of heirs to the British throne. I don't think we need this as a navbox, and the list article has all this information and more. Frietjes ( talk) 21:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:59, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and no parent article Frietjes ( talk) 20:58, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:59, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and duplicates the infobox in British Indian Army Frietjes ( talk) 20:57, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:59, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 20:56, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:00, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 20:55, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:00, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 20:54, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 07:01, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and duplicates navigation provided by Template:1995 Atlantic hurricane season buttons Frietjes ( talk) 20:53, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:33, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and redundant to Template:WikiProject Africa/class Frietjes ( talk) 18:47, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, could be moved to project or user space? Frietjes ( talk) 18:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 18:45, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and out-of-date Frietjes ( talk) 18:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:33, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and out-of-date Frietjes ( talk) 18:43, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
old and unused Frietjes ( talk) 18:42, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and better to just use Category:Alcedo and Alcedo for navigating between members of the genus. Frietjes ( talk) 18:41, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
old, out-of-date, unused, and broken Frietjes ( talk) 18:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and almost entirely redlinks Frietjes ( talk) 18:37, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and empty Frietjes ( talk) 18:37, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:29, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, and not clear if this is a good use of a navbox Frietjes ( talk) 18:35, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:29, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and no documentation Frietjes ( talk) 18:34, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:29, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and nationality/ethnicity-based galleries are generally discouraged. could be userfied or moved to project space? Frietjes ( talk) 18:33, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:27, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused historic roster Frietjes ( talk) 18:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:27, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused with no parent article Frietjes ( talk) 18:31, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:28, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
currently unused and all the people/companies are connected through the links in 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal Frietjes ( talk) 18:30, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:04, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Redundant template, only has one possible transclusion on club page, which I've replaced with the contents (updated). Having a squad instead of the contents on the club page only hinders editors as it is more cumbersome to edit, and doesn't have multiple calls anyway, so nothing gained from template usage. SuperJew ( talk) 10:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. A broader discussion at a village pump about whether we should blank advertising/spam pending speedy deletion or cleanup might be useful. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:06, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
We have a variety of tags for articles that advertise a subject, including {{ db-spam}} (blatant promotional content), {{ peacock}} (terminology being used), {{ autobiography}} (spammy BLP created by subject), and {{ advert}} (everything else). This misrepresents policy and is a bad attempt at imitating {{ copyvio}}. KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 02:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete {{ Marsden-2-EMU}}. No consensus for {{ Marshall-GuinnessRail}}. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:07, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and better to just use the citation templates directly. Frietjes ( talk) 13:51, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. The large discussion linked in the nomination does support deleting this template, and given the relatively small participation here, WP:LOCALCONSENSUS appears to apply. Additionally, it was argued that the usage of the flag as desired by SuperJew violates MOS:FLAG. This wasn't challenged. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:14, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
per prior consensus we don't need these in the cases that they can be easily replaced. Frietjes ( talk) 16:34, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus ~ Rob13 Talk 07:16, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:HD/GKG,
Template:HD/YKG and
Template:HD/Bing.
Very similar templates, displaying the same text with the excepttion of references to the search engine, which could be a parameter
Ppp
ery 15:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 07:16, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
I feel like this is rather unnecessary. There isn't enough material here to justify a template. *Trekker ( talk) 02:53, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete after substituting. ~ Rob13 Talk 05:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
These templates simply take text off the page. This year of templates is complete; the information is static and will not change (since it's clearly not 2005 any more). The templates are transcluded on no more than two pages each, so I see no reason why they shouldn't just be subst'd and deleted. Primefac ( talk) 03:19, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 06:03, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Only used on 2 category talk pages, where it can be substed. KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 23:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 06:03, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Unused. KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 23:19, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete per author. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:33, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
interesting, but currently unused, so I am guessing it's not needed Frietjes ( talk) 22:41, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:16, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
unused in articles. if we are going to deploy this, we should really refactor it to use LUA to avoid the template-based looping. Frietjes ( talk) 22:40, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
That said, every modern notable pro (and many top am) pool and carom billiards (but not snooker) players have profiles at AZBilliards, and it is one of the top three professionally edited non-snooker cue sports publications, along with Billiards Digest and Pool & Billiard Magazine, which also have websites with player profiles. What we might want to do is create player infobox parameters for these profile pages (which are regularly updated with tournament stats and such, for living players). This would be similar in effect and purpose to links to different organizations' breed standards in infoboxes like {{ Infobox dog breed}}, and OMIM (etc.) medical codes in {{ Infobox disease}}. It would consolidate the templating of "just the facts" external resources into one place in the WP site code. A maintenance problem with these profile links is that the sites' databases and the URLs that address them change over time, and if people are manually adding links to them in the ext. links section (or otherwise in some non-programmatic fashion), this will result in potentially thousands of dead links that have to be manually updated. So, while this particular template is basically dead, we'll need to template something like this somewhere at some point. I don't have time to adapt it right now, so go ahead and delete this broken one. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 08:42, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 06:43, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 22:25, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, and we generally don't navigate by a venue's use if it has multiple uses Frietjes ( talk) 22:22, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and all red links Frietjes ( talk) 22:21, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused. seems like it could be useful, but given the age and lack of transclusions, it seems it didn't catch on? Frietjes ( talk) 22:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. There's consensus against keeping this. A redirect may be plausible, but since the template is not currently in use, there isn't an obvious need for one. No prejudice against any editor boldly creating the redirect if they believe it will be used. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:49, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and generally duplicates navigation found in Template:Music production Frietjes ( talk) 22:19, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
single use and generally duplicates navigation provided by Template:Amphoe Buriram. Frietjes ( talk) 15:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:51, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused. we can always add more features to the other box-header templates if needed. Frietjes ( talk) 21:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:52, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and redundant to Template:Commons Frietjes ( talk) 21:18, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:52, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and duplicates navigation found in Template:Sleep Frietjes ( talk) 21:14, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:52, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 21:13, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, and if necessary, we could add more links to Template:Military of Egypt Frietjes ( talk) 21:12, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. A redirect would be misleading because the target template is not a navigation bar. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:55, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and duplicates Template:Brand Management. we don't need more than one of these. Frietjes ( talk) 21:11, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete per author approval Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:51, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
unused and, as far as I can tell, there are no categories which match this pattern Frietjes ( talk) 21:10, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:55, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and generally duplicates Template:Brazil national football team matches Frietjes ( talk) 21:08, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:55, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and out-of-date Frietjes ( talk) 21:07, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:55, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
very few core links. unused. Frietjes ( talk) 21:06, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete per author approval Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 21:05, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:57, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and no decade categories for this subject, so no need for the template Frietjes ( talk) 21:04, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:57, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and redundant to a simple portal link Frietjes ( talk) 21:01, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:57, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, and duplicates List of heirs to the British throne. I don't think we need this as a navbox, and the list article has all this information and more. Frietjes ( talk) 21:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:59, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and no parent article Frietjes ( talk) 20:58, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:59, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and duplicates the infobox in British Indian Army Frietjes ( talk) 20:57, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 06:59, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 20:56, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:00, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 20:55, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:00, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 20:54, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 07:01, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and duplicates navigation provided by Template:1995 Atlantic hurricane season buttons Frietjes ( talk) 20:53, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:33, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and redundant to Template:WikiProject Africa/class Frietjes ( talk) 18:47, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, could be moved to project or user space? Frietjes ( talk) 18:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused Frietjes ( talk) 18:45, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and out-of-date Frietjes ( talk) 18:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:33, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and out-of-date Frietjes ( talk) 18:43, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:32, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
old and unused Frietjes ( talk) 18:42, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and better to just use Category:Alcedo and Alcedo for navigating between members of the genus. Frietjes ( talk) 18:41, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
old, out-of-date, unused, and broken Frietjes ( talk) 18:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and almost entirely redlinks Frietjes ( talk) 18:37, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 21:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and empty Frietjes ( talk) 18:37, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:29, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused, and not clear if this is a good use of a navbox Frietjes ( talk) 18:35, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:29, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and no documentation Frietjes ( talk) 18:34, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:29, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and nationality/ethnicity-based galleries are generally discouraged. could be userfied or moved to project space? Frietjes ( talk) 18:33, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:27, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused historic roster Frietjes ( talk) 18:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:27, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
unused with no parent article Frietjes ( talk) 18:31, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 21:28, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
currently unused and all the people/companies are connected through the links in 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal Frietjes ( talk) 18:30, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:04, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Redundant template, only has one possible transclusion on club page, which I've replaced with the contents (updated). Having a squad instead of the contents on the club page only hinders editors as it is more cumbersome to edit, and doesn't have multiple calls anyway, so nothing gained from template usage. SuperJew ( talk) 10:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus. A broader discussion at a village pump about whether we should blank advertising/spam pending speedy deletion or cleanup might be useful. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:06, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
We have a variety of tags for articles that advertise a subject, including {{ db-spam}} (blatant promotional content), {{ peacock}} (terminology being used), {{ autobiography}} (spammy BLP created by subject), and {{ advert}} (everything else). This misrepresents policy and is a bad attempt at imitating {{ copyvio}}. KATMAKROFAN ( talk) 02:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete {{ Marsden-2-EMU}}. No consensus for {{ Marshall-GuinnessRail}}. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:07, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
unused and better to just use the citation templates directly. Frietjes ( talk) 13:51, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. The large discussion linked in the nomination does support deleting this template, and given the relatively small participation here, WP:LOCALCONSENSUS appears to apply. Additionally, it was argued that the usage of the flag as desired by SuperJew violates MOS:FLAG. This wasn't challenged. ~ Rob13 Talk 07:14, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
per prior consensus we don't need these in the cases that they can be easily replaced. Frietjes ( talk) 16:34, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus ~ Rob13 Talk 07:16, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:HD/GKG,
Template:HD/YKG and
Template:HD/Bing.
Very similar templates, displaying the same text with the excepttion of references to the search engine, which could be a parameter
Ppp
ery 15:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Rob13 Talk 07:16, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
I feel like this is rather unnecessary. There isn't enough material here to justify a template. *Trekker ( talk) 02:53, 28 October 2016 (UTC)