Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 September 7

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log

September 7

edit

Template:Juche symbol

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:19, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scope of this template is odd and it prints that whole disclaimer as well as the image if used. If the image is wanted/useful, it should just be directly put into an article and not with this entire disclaimer like this. Also not transcluded anywhere right now. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 23:31, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Licenses are used on the file page itself and are not mentioned anywhere else. Disclaimers are also not needed anywhere. If an article about the symbol exists and needs explaining, then that should be regular text in the article. In none of these scenarios is a template needed. Gonnym (talk) 08:46, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It seems to me that the legal disclaimer should be in the {{Documentation}} section. Useddenim (talk) 21:19, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While true, even if that were done there'd be no justification for the use of this template. People would be better off just embedding the image directly in wherever they need it. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:06, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Article list

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 relisted on 2025 September 15. ✗plicit 14:20, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Articles lacking sources chart

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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; deleted by Pppery (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 05:06, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template using the graph extension (with one token usage). See related discussion here. Gonnym (talk) 10:16, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may as well group these templates into one TfD if possible. These were all created to support User:MusikBot/CategoryCounter, which generated a graph showing how the size of selected categories changed over time. Task was approved at 2021 BRFA but derailed by the long outage of the Graph extension. MusikAnimal has expressed interest in reviving it but I'm not sure what his timeline would look like, or indeed if these templates would be necessary in a future iteration of the task that uses mw:Extension:Chart. My personal opinion is that it's fine if these are deleted as unused – when/if MusikAnimal gets around to reviving the task, (re)creating any necessary infrastructure will be trivial. If he wants to pull the JSON data from each chart's "data" subpage he's an admin and can view it without problem (if a non-admin wants to revive this task, I can pull the data from deleted pages for you). Best, Ajpolino (talk) 15:56, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there has been growing interest in reviving CategoryCounter. Unfortunately it doesn't seem likely that mw:Extension:JsonConfig will get enabled here for this purpose per phab:T372447, so if the bot is revived, it would need to be on Commons. That then means I should probably make it a global bot task (a bot operating solely for enwiki on Commons seems a bit odd…), which then necessitates a good chunk of work for scalability. So, it's likely going to be "a while" if the bot is ever revived, I'm afraid :( — MusikAnimal talk 00:22, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:06, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Verbandsliga Schleswig-Holstein-Süd-West

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:20, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox with no transclusions and no blue links in the body. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:07, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Does not offer navigation to anywhere. Gonnym (talk) 08:48, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Verbandsliga Schleswig-Holstein-Süd-Ost

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 14:20, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox with no transclusions and just one blue link in the body. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:07, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Does not offer navigation to anywhere. Gonnym (talk) 08:49, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Subjsec

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:16, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Almost a duplicate of Template:Section link that saves a few more characters. These templates aren't used so intensely that an editor can't write the page name when needed. However, this does add an additional maintenance burden, as can be seen by the fact that almost a year later, there is still no documentation (just to be clear, I'd propose deletion even if there was documentation). Usages should be replaced with Template:Section link. Gonnym (talk) 08:36, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with both {{article link}} and {{part section link}}. Note that {{article link}} and {{part section link}} do not preserve links after discussion archiving, whereas {{subjsec}} does, eg. at Wikipedia talk:Citing sources/Archive 56 § Remove citation tools from this page. Daask (talk) 16:01, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When you wrote after discussion archiving, did you mean after a talk page discussion linked to with this template gets archived? If so, how exactly? I don't see anything in your code that handles archiving. Or did you mean after the discussion which uses this template gets archived. If so, that isn't an issue with {{Section link}} as you give it the article name, not a relative name. If you think Section link can be improved with any feature, suggest it there. I oppose any backdoor merger via this TfD, without showing any actual issue with the base template that this solves. Gonnym (talk) 16:27, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: By "After discussion archiving", I mean after the discussion invoking this template is moved from a page like Wikipedia talk:Citing sources to a page like Wikipedia talk:Citing sources/Archive 56. It does this by using {{ROOTPAGENAME}} by default rather than {{PAGENAME}}, as these other templates do. Daask (talk) 16:54, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Techie3 (talk) 14:44, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:National flags

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 20:41, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shitty navbox. It might be useful if redesigned to include many more individual links to flags of nations. Links to lists of multiple nations aren't helpful. Plantdrew (talk) 06:06, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that links to lists of multiple nations isn't helpful. If the article exists, then the link is valid. However, this might duplicate links in Template:Lists of flags and if so, is redundant. Gonnym (talk) 12:59, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Science portalbar

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 relisted on 2025 September 22. Izno (talk) 20:42, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Virus topics

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 relisted on 2025 September 18. (non-admin closure) / RemoveRedSky [talk] 18:08, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Biology nav

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 relisted on 2025 September 22. Izno (talk) 20:43, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Standard gauge

edit
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 23:08, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecated with no transclusions Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:38, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question: This template acts as soft redirect to Template:Standard gauge. Can {{Always substitute}} be added to redirects (and the bot continue to work) if this is converted to one? Gonnym (talk) 07:58, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 02:53, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jonesey95. Useddenim (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym: whatever the behavior of adding {{subst only}} to a redirect, that wouldn't add the parameter—{{standard gauge}} should be replaced with {{track gauge|standard}}, not just {{track gauge}}. Therefore, I don't think a redirect is an option.

I think keep and un-deprecate as a subst-only shorthand makes sense. Deletion is a second choice. We shouldn't keep deprecated templates around forever, so either undeprecate or delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 16:08, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, I am also fine with delete. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:52, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This template isn't linked from anywhere so new users shouldn't encounter it, and it has been deprecated for over 6 years, so veteran editors know not to use it. I don't see how this is still useful. Gonnym (talk) 13:32, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Gonnym. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:55, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_September_7&oldid=1315259661"