Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 July 7 - Wikipedia


Article Images

S-Bahn Mitteldeutschland succession templates

edit

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. ✗plicit 23:38, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

useless template, simple strike through is perfectly sufficient and this is disruptive and hideous. PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:22, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep @Praxidicae: The reasoning is this: If you want strike-out part of your own comment, you use single strikethrough. If you want strike-out a spam/invalid comment you use double strikethrough. If you want to strike-out particularly bad spam/vandalism, you use quadruple strikethrough. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. Just simply no. This isn't an established process and there is absolutely no reason for it. Strikethrough is to indicate various things - if we wanted to make a comment unreadable with a template, it would just be removed. Stop creating useless templates. PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on the creator's rational for its existence. Gonnym (talk) 22:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:52, 7 July 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. ✗plicit 12:06, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This template has the same information as the Template:Cheltenham Town F.C., only this one contains more information. Because of the less related subject to this club, I think we should let the seasons stay in the Cheltenham Town F.C. template and delete the Cheltenham Town F.C. seasons template because then it becomes useless. Followertje (talk) 20:03, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same for Template:Doncaster Rovers F.C. seasons Only here the Template:Doncaster Rovers F.C. contains a little bit more related subjects. But I still think this template is to much.Followertje (talk) 20:28, 7 July 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. ✗plicit 12:11, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only digital multicast network with a navbox of this type, and it's quite poor for navigation. Only six currently affiliated stations even use it. List of LATV affiliates and Category:LATV affiliates provide sufficient connection. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:48, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So why do we want to delete the entry/template for LATV Stations? What is the purpose of deleting useful information?? 2600:1700:1A30:9C0:115D:63A8:2C89:17C1 (talk) 00:47, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you read Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, which explains that not everything needs all three. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:30, 13 July 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).

Netball competition infoboxes

edit

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 merge to Template:Infobox international netball competition. ✗plicit 12:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Each event does not need its own infobox. They are very similar. These infoboxes should be merged and renamed to {{Infobox international netball competition}}. –Aidan721 (talk) 14:25, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No they shouldn't, they're not harming anyone Global-Cityzen (talk) 01:35, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Should be noted this is the creator of {{Infobox Netball Quad Series}}. And to respond, they are they same template created three different times, so yes they should be merged. –Aidan721 (talk) 03:59, 8 July 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).