This page has anadministrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. This notice will be automatically removed byAnomieBOT (talk) when the backlog is cleared.
The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in thetemplate namespace andmodule namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:
Stub templates
Stub templates and categories should be listed atCategories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories,unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
Userboxes
Userboxes should be listed atMiscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
Templates that are associated with particularWikipedia policies or guidelines, such as thespeedy deletion templates, cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant policy or guideline.
The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
The template is not used, either directly or bytemplate substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks),and has no likelihood ofbeing used.
The template violates a policy such asNeutral point of view orCivility and it can't be fixed through normal editing.
Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it,WikiProject Templates may be able to help.
Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted byconsensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.
To list a template for deletion or merging, follow the three-step process below. Donot include the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps.
If you have never nominated a template for deletion or usedTwinkle before, you might want to do it manually to avoid making mistakes. For more experienced editors, using Twinkle is recommended, as it automates some of these steps. (After navigating to the template you want to nominate, click its dropdown menu in the top right of the page: TW, and then select "XFD".)
Step
Instructions
Step 1
Tag the template
Paste one of the following notices to the top of the template page:
If the template is designed to besubstituted, add<noinclude>...</noinclude> around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template. Example:<noinclude>{{subst:Tfd}}</noinclude>
Use an edit summary like Nominated for deletion/merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
Before saving your edit, preview the page to ensure the TfD notice is displayed properly.
Multiple templates
If you are nominating multiple templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with{{subst:Tfd|heading=discussion title}} or{{subst:Tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}} instead of the versions given above, replacingdiscussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing thePAGENAME code).
Related categories
If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, paste{{Catfd|template name}} to the top of any categories that could be deleted as a result of the TfD, replacingtemplate name with the name of the nominated template. (If you instead nominated multiple templates, use the meaningful title you chose earlier:{{Catfd|header=title of nomination}}.)
TemplateStyles pages
If you are nominatingTemplateStyles pages, these templates won't work. Instead, paste this CSS comment to the top of the page:
/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025_December_15#Template:template_name.css */
For deletion:{{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
For merging:{{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}
If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add{{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without square brackets|result of previous TfD}} in the|text= field immediately before your rationale (or alternatively at the very end, after the last}}).
Use an edit summary such asAdding deletion/merger nomination of [[Template:template name]].
Multiple templates
If you are nominating multiple templates, paste the following code instead. You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters|). Use the same meaningful title that you chose in Step 1.
Multiple templates for deletion:{{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|title=meaningful title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}
Multiple templates for merging:{{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}
If there is a template you want the other templates to be merged into, you can optionally specify it using|with=.
Related categories
If this template deletion proposal involves a category populated solely by templates, paste this code in the|text= field of the{{Tfd2}} template, before your rationale:{{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
Step 3
Notify users
Notify the creator of the template, the main contributors, and (if you're proposing a merger) the creator of the other template. (To find them, look in thepage history ortalk page of the template.) To do this, paste one of the following in their user talk pages:
For merging:{{subst:Tfm notice|template name|other template's name}}~~~~
Multiple templates: There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination. In these cases, write a personal message.
If you see anyWikiProjects banners (they look like this) at the top of the template's talk page, you can let them know about the discussion. Most WikiProjects are subscribed toArticle alerts, which means they are automatically notified. If you think they have not been notified, you can paste the same message in the projects' talk pages, or useDeletion sorting lists. Note that Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects.
Consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination notice is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.
After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors
While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD, nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply withWikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.
To encourage participation by less experienced editors, avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give thecriterion that it meets.
Notifying related WikiProjects:WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{subst:Tfd notice}} for this. Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project'sArticle Alerts automatically, if they aresubscribed to the system. For instance, tagging a template with{{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion inWikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.
Notifying main contributors: While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the creator and any main contributors of the template and its talk page that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in thepage history ortalk page.
At this point, no further action is necessary on your part. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone other than you will either close the discussion or, if needed, "relist" it for another seven days of discussion. If the nomination is successful, it will be moved to theHolding Cell until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.
Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand thedeletion policy and explain your reasoning.
People will sometimes also recommendsubst,subst and delete, or similar. This means they think the template text should be "hard-coded" into the articles that are currently using it. Depending on the content, the template itself may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may behistory-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.
Administrators should read theclosing instructions before closing a nomination. Note thatWP:XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.
Subst and delete. Subst into the provinces article per Xiliuheshui and delete the templates. These are not navigation templates but content placed in the navigation template sections.Gonnym (talk)10:24, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
substitute into the parent articles anddelete per above. we already have navboxes for navigating between the cities within a province, so the only non-redundant use for this is in the main province articles.Frietjes (talk)20:27, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The expanded template takes up an entire laptop screen. That is far too big. We don't need a navbox to link to every single Oakland-related article; that's what categories are for.Pi.1415926535 (talk)22:15, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You need articles first then a navbox. I don't think you will be fast enough to create at least five links for a navbox. Plus, the one article is suspect for GNG.WikiCleanerMan (talk)15:17, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiCleanerMan: Typically I collect five articles before making a navbox. The school district, the relevant high school, any shopping mall, and any airport should push it to five at least. Any National Register of Historic Places sites in the Smyrna city limits should push it higher. If there's an Amtrak station, that can do it too... I'll try now.WhisperToMe (talk)17:21, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found the relevant school district (in Georgia law, school districts are independent governments), a public comprehensive high school in the city limits, a list of mayors of Smyrna, and the public library. There is a covered bridge associated with Smyrna, though it lies outside the city limits.See PDF p. 4/6 and compare with the actual location of the covered bridge.WhisperToMe (talk)18:48, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a simple wrapper for{{Mbox}} adding a message "This list has beensplit forimproved performance." It is currently used on 60 mainspace list articles (about 20 groups of 2–6 sibling sublists; about 5 parents of child sublists). Issues are as follows:
the message violatesWP:SELFREF and has cross-namespace links. The average reader does not know or care about splitting and performance; the message is likely to confuse by answering a question the reader not only did not ask but does not understand.
{{Mbox}} has the wrong semantics. This is obvious in mobile view, in which the contents are collapsed with a "learn more" toggle link, expanding into a "section issues" notice.
The template is ugly and not user friendly. Look atList of disco artists (F–K) — how many readers will be helped by the template?
The template is redundant. Standardised boilerplate templates is useful in complex scenarios with good styling, but this is so crude that it saves no labour compared to hand-editing a sentence linking to the next/previous part of the list. Alternative templates include navigation templates (e.g. featured listEngland cricket team Test results (1975–1989) has{{England cricket team results}}) or{{main}} (e.g.Japanese conjugation has both{{main}} and{{List has been split}} on some sections; the latter adds nothing.)
I suggest in the short term, delete the template and replace {{List has been split|Foo}} with {{Centre|Sublists: Foo}}. Editors can further prettify thereafter at leisure.jnestorius(talk)19:11, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The navbox is very limited and should most likely be deleted because of how small it is, warranted that there are only4 articles linked in here, with the majority beingcharacters from theUmamusume: Pretty Durby franchise, which could be easily found without a navbox.ConeKota (talk)16:30, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Propose mergingTemplate:WikidataCoord withTemplate:Coord. It has come to my attention that these two templates, which used to function differently, now duplicate behvior. In arecent discussion this was clarified. For context, my current understanding is that:
{{coord}}used to not support pulling from wikidata. It now does with{{coord|display=i}} (for example)
{{coord}}used to not support pulling from a specific QID, It now does with{{coord|qid=Q1234}}
At this point, I see no reason that these cannot be merged.Note the parameters are structured differently in the two templates so a simple redirectis not possible at this time. Most uses will have to be manually converted (should be able to write a bot script to help out). If I am missing something and someone can point out a reason that these 2 templates need to coexist, I will happily withdraw this, but I did try to do myresearch first.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)04:49, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OR template with no support for the claims of points of interest in Putnam County, Florida. Some of the entries are town and local communites - not a point of interest like landmarks. Other entries are bridges and islands which are not points of interests.WikiCleanerMan (talk)02:33, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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'stalk page or in adeletion review).
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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep and add to the talk pages. While I remember somewhere there was objection to adding it to the talk pages I can't find it though there was discussion withUser:Scolaire atTalk:Republic of Ireland/Archive 21#Ireland naming discussions where they suggested usingTemplate:Ireland naming discussions but that template only gives those that tool place at Ireland Collaboration and not the others and it doesn't give specific links to each discussion along with the result so if anything I'd get rid of that template instead. If there is consensus not to do this then it could be moved to something likeTalk:Ireland/naming but otherwise given how controversial this was and the requirement for discussions to take place in a different place than the article talk pages I think this template should be kept and added to the talk pages.Crouch, Swale (talk)14:54, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know. To any admins, please do not close this discussion until the one linked above ends so we know if it should be kept and added or not.Gonnym (talk)19:46, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A mention in two books is not "relatively common". This navbox failsWP:NAVBOX items 2 and 4, and possibly more. I have no objections to this template being recreated when there is a main article and four or more articles to link from the navbox body. –Jonesey95 (talk)21:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to be bitey about this new navbox, but there is no main article for this navbox and it contains only two links to articles. There is nothing to navigate between here. No prejudice to recreation in the future when there is a main article and at least four or five articles for the navbox body. –Jonesey95 (talk)19:30, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This new "X English" talk page template was createdwithout any discussion that I can find by a now globally locked editor in August 2025. That editor then spammed the template onto 200+ talk pages, including pages that already had "Use X English" templates on their articles, such asEuropean Court of Justice. This one-person crusade seems to have made a bit of a mess.
Euro English is disputed as a valid variant of English. The article provides no guidance that would help editors use correct spellings that are different from British English spellings. This template should be deleted completely, and each article should be evaluated on its own for appropriate placement of an English variant template. –Jonesey95 (talk)18:37, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As with several former 'Use X English' templates, this template is redundant to Use British English. As stated on the template page, it is an instruction to use 'Sri Lankan English spelling, which, as noted in the article, is the same as British English spelling.'Dgp4004 (talk)18:01, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Replace with{{Use British English}} as not usable here on the English Wikipedia. The effort of having articles identified as using British English spelling and word choices should not be lost; do not simply delete transclusions outright. This "Use X English" family of templates is intended to provide editors with advice about word choice ("truck" v. "lorry"), spelling ("color" v. "colour"), and occasionally grammatical construction ("Since 1960" v. "From 1960"). Other than those differences, writers at the English Wikipedia are supposed to followMOS:COMMONALITY, writing in standard English that can be understood by the most readers. The article atSri Lankan English describespronunciation, which is not relevant for a written encyclopedia. The examples given in thevocabulary andgrammar sections are not usable here on the English Wikipedia without glossing, perMOS:COMMONALITY. The article provides no usable guidance about how to write in Sri Lankan English that is different from guidance that would be provided for British English, so this template is not useful or usable (TFDreason 3) on the English Wikipedia. The{{Use British English}} template provides appropriate guidance for editors. –Jonesey95 (talk)18:21, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Do not redirect because the idea is to reduce confusion, not increase it. These are maintenance templates unrelated to nationalism.Johnuniq (talk)23:54, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Both navboxes have too large of a scope for there to be reliable and defined navigation for a topic like this. Both cover almost every event in Poland for the respective periods and contain links to articles that are covered by other navboxes. Such as elections, protests, and matters of international relations. If a subject does not have a respective navbox like for protests, then one should be created. And for some articles, its best to be just covered by a respective Poland subject category if a template does not suffice. But also precedent ofWikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2025 December 1#Template:History of Thailand (1932–1973).
Delete: per nom, but merge "Any such comments may be removed or refactored." to the talk page header template. No reason to have two separate templates.Gommeh📖🎮19:15, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is literally a difference between them. It gives literally more specific information sayingThis page is not a forum for general discussion about subject. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to the improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Nicolette Boele at the Reference desk.. Another option would be to add the more specific information that any such comments may be removed or refactored to the talk page header.Servite et contribuere (talk)23:22, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Do not delete this without searching for pages which contain this template without a Talk header. The main redundancy argument is only true on pages with both templates.CapnZapp (talk)13:33, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing that out! I compiled some lists of talk pages that might help with the renaming/deletion process:
Unused, and I can't think of a scenario where this template would even be useful (what does the{{babel}} template have to do with templates like{{userlinks}}?) Re-nominating because Twinkle thought this was a userbox and sent it to MFD instead.Sugar Tax (talk)17:24, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge per nom. IPs don't have editors on them anymore so leaving specially-crafted block templates on IP talk pages is pointless. If I've missed some critical counterargument, please ping me.Toadspike[Talk]17:20, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
support nom. templates specifically for IP editors don't have much use, especially since the recent introduction of temporary accounts to enwiki.Oreocooke (talk)19:14, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I understand that unused templates are an issue, but nominating a template for deletiontwo days after an temporary user replaced it in an article is excessive.@Gonnym: I'm not going to suggest a bright-line rule, but how about give it a few weeks in these cases to see if the change has consensus before nominating the template? Anyway, I've restored it.Mackensen(talk)11:42, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The route map is already outdated (Skyshuttle is missing) and will become completely pointless/unmaintainable in a few months when Lines 4, 6 and 8 open.Asamboi (talk)20:45, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominating as I've had this on my mind for a while now, and using similar arguments fromhere.
I don't think I've seen any other list of members of a local government like a city council, much less for a local government from a the early period of the city. I don't even think I've seen any for state-level governments as well. I think that this is redundant to the articles that cover the lists, like the district and board president articles, especially since a lot of members don't have articles in the first place.reppoptalk07:55, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominating as I've had this on my mind for a while now. I don't think I've seen any other list of members of a local government like a city council, much less for a local government from a period of 10 years in the 1890s and 1900s. I don't even think I've seen any for state-level governments as well. I think that this is redundant to the articles that cover the lists, like the district and board president articles.reppoptalk07:52, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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'stalk page or in adeletion review).
@Izno can be kept. I have no problem in withdrawing nomination for route templates that have have been added to articles during the discussion.Gonnym (talk)18:52, 9 December 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Delete per nom. I did stumble across this the other day and wondered what it was for. Not to mention that NATO did not exist before 1949.Dgp4004 (talk)18:36, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, or delete and create a tracking category for the{{Error}} template. Just a quick reply on the technical side. Unused: yes for now (the template is two months old and pairs with{{Error if empty}} – which, by the way, had almost no transclusions as well two months after its creation). Replaceable via parser functions: impossible. What it does cannot be done differently. This consists in avoiding false positive transclusions of{{Error}} when template parameters are not parsed lazily. There is a better solution that allows to delete this template: that of monitoring the{{Error}} template using tracking categories. I am totally happy with that as well (it would actually be a step forward). --Grufo (talk)14:30, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The creator of this template has created multiple templates that were mostly unused or barely used. This isn't different. They should first identify places where a code is missing then create it (or better yet, request others to do so). This was stated, but it seems this needs to be said over and over, en.wiki is not a code repository. The templates and modules here should be created when they are needed. Side note,{{Error if empty}} is used in only 4 pages. Those should also be looked at later to see if indeed that template is needed there.Gonnym (talk)17:16, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -Technically,User:Shredlordsupreme should wait until those pages are deleted before nominating the template as it currently is a valid navbox. But having looked at the pages linked to by the template, they are doomed. I see no harm in deleting this template at the same time.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)22:34, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I created this as a user-space helper with a broader Canadian content and cultural-sensitivity intent. It doesn’t belong in Template space, and I’m fine with deletion.Topoli-onpoli-canpoli (talk)20:00, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As with several former 'Use X English' templates, this template is redundant to Use British English. As stated on the template page, it is an instruction to use 'Jamaican English spelling, which, as noted in the article, is the same as British English spelling.'Dgp4004 (talk)19:03, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete These templates have no purpose and carry an implausible suggestion that an editor has to study Jamaican English before editing an affected article.Johnuniq (talk)00:13, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Replace with{{Use British English}} as not usable here on the English Wikipedia. The effort of having articles identified as using British English spelling and word choices should not be lost; do not simply delete transclusions outright. This "Use X English" family of templates is intended to provide editors with advice about word choice ("truck" v. "lorry"), spelling ("color" v. "colour"), and occasionally grammatical construction ("Since 1960" v. "From 1960"). Other than those differences, writers at the English Wikipedia are supposed to followMOS:COMMONALITY, writing in standard English that can be understood by the most readers. The article atJamaican English describesphonology, which is not relevant for a written encyclopedia. It spendsone sentence on grammar, providing no guidance other than that it is similar to British English. The lead says that "Jamaican English tends to follow British English spelling conventions". The article provides zero examples of how written Jamaican English differs from British English; any examples of Jamaican Patois would fail to conform withMOS:COMMONALITY, and any such words should be glossed for non-Jamaican readers. The article provides no real guidance about how to write in Jamaican English that is different enough from guidance that would be provided for British English, so this template is not useful or usable (TFDreason 3) on the English Wikipedia. The{{Use British English}} template provides appropriate guidance for editors. –Jonesey95 (talk)17:46, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - strongly disagree with nom and all prior delete votes above (no normative backing to any reasons given; and no,COMMONALITY has no bearing on these TfDs, despite how often it pops up in these - cfthis extensive MOS talk re COMMONALITY's applicability here) - would actually votedelete due to{{ties}} and consensus in the aforementioned MOS talk (as I didfor UCarE and UBelE) except that (i) this is already an established template [used more often than{{IUPAC spelling}} and{{IUPAC spelling US}} even; cfWikipedia articles by national variety of English]; (ii) this template quite obviously meets none of theWP:TFD#REASONS [for 2, note that Wikipedia isnot an IRS on anything, much less linguistics - one has merely to open a JamE dictionary or look up the tonnes of scholarship on JamE to see that JamE != BrE, regardless of what Wikipedia says, and despite the fact that JamE is similar to BrE (as are a bunch of other Englishes obviously); cfWP:CARIB/E for a non-IRS overview]. Finally, note that if we were to accept nom and prior delete vote rationales, we'd basically end up w/ onlyUse X English templates for BrE, AmE, and possibly CanE, as once we've disregarded how heavily a template is used and whether it actually meets any TFD#REASONS, we'd find theUse X English templates ofall quasi-BrE Englishes (AusE, NZE, etc) "redundant" on the basis of non-IRS sources - really can't overstate how silly that all seems in light ofMOS:ENGVAR. (But if that'sreally what we want then I'd votedelete in agroup [not piecemeal] TfD for allUse X English templates of all quasi-BrE Englishes [but to be replaced by{{ties}},not{{AmE}} nor{{BrE}}].) –Asdfjrjjj (talk)00:18, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To editorZackmann08: prolly same as diff as b/w NZE vs BrE or AusE vs BrEimo (ie only slight spelling diff; but a bit more vocab/idiom/convention diffs, even in the written formal register - enough such that linguistic consensus is JamE != BrE, just like NZE != BrE and AusE != BrE, regardless of how similar they seem to non-Jamaicans, non-Aussies, non-Kiwis [whatexactly the threshold is for linguists to say English dialectx !=y rather thanx =y is a question for linguists/lexicographers/researchers, not any of us here imo]). Best I can do isWP:CARIB/E, but cf actual IRSs there and in Ggl Scholar for details! -Asdfjrjjj (talk)01:00, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Probably? Therein lies the problem I'm afraid. The case for retention always falls down when asked to give some solid examples of what a template is actually for. These templates, which are completely hidden from readers, exist primarily to instruct editors in a clear and unambiguous way what sort of spelling is in use in an article. That's all they do. They aren't there to bolster national pride or somehow take possession of an article.
No case has been made that this template differs significantly from any of the others which use British English spelling and which have been deleted.Dgp4004 (talk)23:19, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
when one visited theModule:Params/doc page. Now that that template is gone, it is still possible to obtain the same result by directly transcluding the module. The module appears currently unused because whoever removed{{relative link}} from the page did not do a good job at avoiding regressions. In general, we need the functionality offered by this module whenever a transcluded page displays relative paths (so that these appear differently depending on the transcluding page) – for instance, if page a/b/c displays a relative path to a/b/c/d, this should appear as ./d when visiting a/b/c, but should appear as ../c/d when visiting a/b/e. --Grufo (talk)20:41, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We have already litigate this at 2 seprate TFDs linked to above. This has already been deemed an unhelpful, overly complicated and generally useless template. No reason to keep the module that exclusively was implemented by 2 templates that have been deleted.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)21:58, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This module does not implement templates. The templates that were removed added a further layer and a functionality to this module: that of creating links. --Grufo (talk)00:27, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a code repository. Please find a problem, then implement a solution, not the other way around. Yes, I have read the above.Johnuniq (talk)00:18, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few sandbox subpages that you can freely use to experiment with new testcases for {{#invoke:params}} at./sandbox,./sandbox2,./sandbox3,./sandbox4 and./sandbox5. In order to avoid possible conflicts with other editors, we suggest you use the one with the oldest last edit, which currently is./sandbox2 (refresh).
whereas, when transcluded in—let's say—Module:Params/doc, it would show:
Now instead, after the regression, the template shows no links at all (no matter where it is transcluded):
There are a few sandbox subpages that you can freely use to experiment with new testcases for {{#invoke:params}}. In order to avoid possible conflicts with other editors, we suggest you use the one with the oldest last edit, which currently is Module:Params/testcases/sandbox2 (refresh).
The links can be manually restored, of course, but without this module they cannot be in short format. They will need to be something like this other example:
There are a few sandbox subpages that you can freely use to experiment with new testcases for {{#invoke:params}} at
In order to avoid possible conflicts with other editors, we suggest you use the one with the oldest last edit, which currently isModule:Params/testcases/sandbox2 (refresh).
In Wikipedia terms, bludgeoning is where someone attempts to force their point of view through a very high number of comments, such as contradicting every viewpoint that is different from their own.
It is not necessary or desirable to reply to every comment in a discussion.
Why would you ever makeModule:Params/testcases/sandbox2? A testcase page should never have sandboxes. I'm really not sure you understand the coding conventions we have at en.wiki, because almost every single template or module you wrote is completely non-standard.Gonnym (talk)12:51, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because these sandboxes are not module sandboxes, but wikitext sandboxes for testing the module. More concretely, if you want to prototype a new testcase subpage, or even a new template that usesModule:Params, you are free to do it there. --Grufo (talk)12:58, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
you are free to do it there - no you shouldn't. Ever. Each template or module has its own /sandbox and /testcases page. They are the only ones that should be used to testcase those pages. Not some random page with a random title. Again, please follow en.wiki standards, or just stop writing code here please.Gonnym (talk)21:42, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
“Each template or module has its own /sandbox and /testcases page”: And in factModule:Params has both.“They are the only ones that should be used to testcase those pages”: You cannot test a module designed to deal with template parameters without using test templates that invoke the module; these test templates are usually subpages ofModule:Params/testcases (e.g./testcases/tnumerical).“Again, please follow en.wiki standards”: I see you are eager to help. Please find me a solution on how to test this module without using test subtemplates. I am all ears. --Grufo (talk)13:57, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym: Can I ask you how we can obtain this (see above) via magic words?
for instance, if page a/b/c displays a relative path to a/b/c/d, this should appear as ./d when visiting a/b/c, but should appear as ../c/d when visiting a/b/e.
Lets start from the end here, I don't think there are many times, or any really, where you'll have a/b/c/d and you'll need something that isn't the first or the end. It's just not how en.wiki works. Now for your question. Please give me a real, current page, that needs this and I'll show you how to get it with magic words. I don't work in hypotheticals.Gonnym (talk)21:40, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This module was created with concrete use cases in mind, specifically subpages of modules and template (see above).“It's just not how en.wiki works”: I am not sure where you found the manifesto of how enwiki works. My approach is quite pragmatic. If we have—let's say—Module:Params/doc/examples/four cells per row table, the choices are two:
We decide to show always that long path
We use a shorter, more readable, relative path
Wikitext already allows to use relative paths: for instance, if you are inModule:Params/doc/examples you can write[[/four cells per row table]] and you will see/four cells per row table. What wikitextdoes not allow though (or at least no that easily, as far as I know) is havinga transcluded page that links toModule:Params/doc/examples/four cells per row table and shows the correct relative path depending on where it is transcluded (so it must show./four cells per row table when transcluded inModule:Params/doc/examples, but must show./examples/four cells per row table when transcluded inModule:Params/doc, and so on—do not pay too much attention to the initial dot for now, this module allows to write it or omit it). If you accept the challenge, that is what I invite you to do via magic words. Careful though, above a certain length that solution might require to be templatized. Moreover, this module is truly a general solution for all these cases, so whatever you find, if you do, might not be as good. --Grufo (talk)23:32, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no real benefit to have relative paths in links like "/examples/four cells per row table".
I am not sure where you found the manifesto of how enwiki works - at some point, after having most of your work be deleted, you should realize that what you are doing is wrong.Gonnym (talk)08:44, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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'stalk page or in adeletion review).
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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The reason it has no transclusions is because I removed the last of them yesterday... I'm still trying to figure out if this can be used. This book is cited on nearly 1000 articles (seehere - doesn't catch all of them). It would have been nice if you reached out before nominating this... I might look into having a bot transform the citations to this book into this template. I can add a bunch of transclusions right now if you really want me to.MediaKyle (talk)18:12, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the transclusions of this template because I wasn't sure how to fix it. Eventually, I figured out how to fix it, and now I'm trying to determine whether I can have a bot replace the ~1000 citations to this book with this template, so if and when the Nova Scotia Archives changes the URL again, we won't have all those citations turn to deadlinks. I was going to add some transclusions to this after I saw it posted here but it adds the "this template is under discussion" banner to the references section so I don't want to do that until this is done.MediaKyle (talk)11:58, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've now put forward a property proposal on Wikidata for a Nova Scotia Place Names ID, and it looks like it's going to go through -- kindly keep this template for now while I work things out. Thanks,MediaKyle (talk)15:02, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The property proposal isn't finished yet, I don't know what you expect me to do with it yet. I was going to add a bunch of transclusions after this closes, but whatever. Just get rid of it, I'm losing my motivation here.MediaKyle (talk)11:59, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was hoping we could just take it on faith that I have plans for this -- I was intending to rename the template and add "under construction" once this TfD closed. Frankly, this whole experience has been immensely disappointing. The nominator noted how old it was, so they must have seen I was editing it at the time. The only reason this template even ended up here is because I drew attention to it by orphaning it to start experimenting. Now, even as I have an open property proposal with unanimous support, we still want to delete this template here. Why is it so offensive to have an orphaned template that we must delete it even in the face of an editor saying he has plans for it? This was supposed to be the next step in a project of fixing up about 2,300 Nova Scotian geography articles, which I have already poured dozens of hours into, but yet it remains an "unused template with no reason to keep". I am frustrated by the bureaucracy of all of this.MediaKyle (talk)17:16, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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'stalk page or in adeletion review).
Keep - There are 13 seasons there. If it was 13/13 seasons, that would be kept, no doubt. Then there's the navigation between clubs. The existence of historical seasons that nobody has been able to/bothered to archive yet doesn't mean we get rid of the templateUnknown Temptation (talk)23:36, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This should be kept. I should have looked further at the template. My delete vote has been striked. Navbox meets merits of navigational purposes. --WikiCleanerMan (talk)00:02, 13 December 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep Protection is useful and important, but let's say in the case of a refined redirect, and the target name has change E.G., protection might make it harder. E.G. Having to request an admin. Honestly think the rationale is quality, but I feel like it would be good for redirects that should obviously not become articles. E.G. Redirects from a Non Notable Child to a notable parent.Servite et contribuere (talk)23:18, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Propose mergingTemplate:Infobox swimming venue withTemplate:Infobox venue. Very limited use by this Infobox. The only info would be lost at the moment is the specific measurements of the different pools in the complex.I do not think this information needs to be in the infobox at all (MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE). Put it in a chart in the article if it is noteworthy. That can be placed in|dimensions= and a new param|dimension_label= created to override the default of "Field Size" to say "Pool Size" (or something else) when appropriate.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)01:06, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I very much disagree that the dimensions don't belong in the infobox; other sporting venues have their playing area dimensions in their infobox, as it's a defining characteristic of the venue. Otherwise I support the merge.oknazevad (talk)02:49, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Infobox swimming venue into Infobox venue. For the dimension of swimming pool inside the Infobox venue, how about we create infobox sub-parameter (do I say this correctly?) specifically if we want to talk about swimming pool within that Infobox venue? Just like inTemplate:Infobox power station where they have special set of parameters for different types of power station (e.g. geothermal, nuclear, solar etc)Chongkian (talk)03:34, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Chongkian I mean we could... But I'm not sure it is really necessary.|dimension_label= would override the "Field size". If you think it is better to have a|pool_dimension= we could do that instead... The issue would be if someone tried to use|dimension= there would be no way to change it from saying "Field size" which for a pool would obviously be wrong.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)04:36, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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'stalk page or in adeletion review).
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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep@Sapphaline: without going too far down this rabbit hole, it does appear that coin image box styles things a bit differently. Can you demonstrate with an edit diff how one can be replaced by the other? If so I will strike my !vote and switch to delete...Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)00:14, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The idea ist to use it at the lemaCanon RF lens mount instead of the Table Canon RF-mount lenses. Advatage: if a new Lens is added to WD, it is automaticalley put to the leama. Similar Template is used in german Wikipedia for the lemaRF-Bajonett. I have just fixed recently last bugs. So I vote for keeping it. BRGodeNehler (talk)10:25, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The personal remark are meant to be a comment on the situlation. I also mentioned that Infoboxes in general are:
more visible (due to usually being at the top of the page)
reader-friendly (some Infoboxes can have good design which appeals more and be more eye catching)
then navboxes which has less effort in design put in and placed at the bottom of the page, which can make some readers not even know the concept of a navbox.
Design is up for debate. Its about avoiding redundancy. Two templates for one thing is not good. Your keep reason does not fit any reason per policy of basic issues that sidebars like this present.WikiCleanerMan (talk)23:30, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see then, uhh...
Why does the navbox take higher priority over the sidebar? shouldn't the information of said navbar be moved to the sidebar for the reasons that I stated?
So, the navbox takes higher priority over the sidebar due to having more information?
Well, like the name ofPeruvian political crisis short suggest, I think that it supposed to summarize the information ofPeruvian political crisis in order to not make the information less confusing and more understandable for the reader to read.
Still, there should still be benefits thatPeruvian political crisis short could still offer thatPeruvian political crisis couldn't, not everything is needed to be deleted automatically just because it's immediately useless in your view (in my personal opinion at least.)
keep it's 3 actually, (one of them wasn't linked mistakenly until now) and this template was nominated once before 3 or 4 years ago with no consensus.Sports2021 (talk)23:27, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Title links don't count. It still fails NENAN. All links can be found through the category and previous noms don't factor considering the lack of five links for the template. This has no other usage outside of those three. It still fails navigation. Not everything needs a template for it.WikiCleanerMan (talk)23:34, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is not unused at all—it is used on several racing driver biographies as a legend for karting results; seeCharles Leclerc,Lando Norris,Oscar Piastri,Kimi Antonelli, etc. The legend is different to the standard motorsport one as points systems are not universal in kart racing and change race-by-race. In the process of its usage being expanded and standardised.MB243716:30, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Transclude on articles. Templates are not pages users should be sent to readcontent. Templates are also not searchable by default, so they are hidden pages for most readers. Legends should be transcluded near their tables. If multiple pages on the same page use a legend, then transclude it once at the top of the section or page. This is how every single other topic does this.Gonnym (talk)08:53, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unused and a similar embedded box is used on the project page instead. Can be moved on project space for preservation. But project is defunct so there may not be a need for this.WikiCleanerMan (talk)15:41, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The project uses a different navigation template. We should stop moving things no one wants to pages no one looks at.Gonnym (talk)15:50, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiCleanerMan Hi, this template and its basis module is a component ofTemplate:MergedMap. This template is very helpful for testing its parent template and also when only we want one pushpin map. Such modules and templates are helpful for good design of Wikipedia and makes reusable components for well design.Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk)16:29, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Recently created but still fails navigational requirements. Only four articles of relevance to the subject. Same as navbox below. If the other text in navbox is to be created, we can userfy until ready for mainspace use.WikiCleanerMan (talk)15:36, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Recently created but still fails navigational requirements. Only three articles of relevance to the subject. If the other two articles are going to be created we can userfy this until it is ready for mainspace use.WikiCleanerMan (talk)15:36, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another template using the disabled graph extension. If it can be converted to the new Chart extension then convert. If it can't, then delete template.Gonnym (talk)19:35, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another template using the disabled graph extension. If it can be converted to the new Chart extension then convert. If it can't, then delete template.Gonnym (talk)19:35, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another template using the disabled graph extension. If it can be converted to the new Chart extension then convert. If it can't, then delete template.Gonnym (talk)19:32, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's unused because the graph extension was out of commission for so long. It can be updated and brought back.czar04:31, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. The template was created at the end of January 2021 when GameStop's stocks exploded. A static image can be made of its stock history. –The Grid (talk)16:32, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and replace with static image per The Grid. The graph template this relies on is being deleted, and the graph extension has never really recovered since the security vulnerability a few years ago. An image is just as good and mostly future proof now that the price doesn't need to be updated periodically.—Wug·a·po·des17:39, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another template using the disabled graph extension. If it can be converted to the new Chart extension then convert. If it can't, then delete template.Gonnym (talk)16:03, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As the person who created this template (16 years ago! Where has the time gone?), Ithink I know what this means (although "LST-ed" is new to me). If I understand this right, you would replace this template on each page with a statement like "Nash's Test career bowling average of 12.60 is the fourth lowest of anyone with at least ten Test wickets, behind only Charles Marriott, with an average of 8.72, Frederick Martin (10.07) and George Lohmann (10.75)." This seems a longwinded and less complete way of showing the information on the template; less complete because you now do not know who is else is in the top 15 and their respective averages. Indeed, templates like this one were created to give readers a better, more concise understanding of the topic. However, if the rules are now to delete templates like this, so be it, I guess. --Roisterer (talk)12:13, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sidebar used only on one article. Sidebar is not supported by a main article or information other than a redirect to a section on the main KKR team article. Also, all articles linked are covered by respective navboxes. This is not needed.WikiCleanerMan (talk)02:29, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unnecessary sidebar used on sporting event articles that takes up space. For the vast majority of articles, all of the links used on respective international sporting events are covered by their respective navboxes or are linked already on either the main tournament article or the respective yearly tournament articles. This sidebar is redundant and is not doing anything that navboxes or the articles aren't doing.WikiCleanerMan (talk)02:21, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after making sure the bottom navigation template has the links. To The Grid, when the amount of links is few in numbers, that could work. When you have dozens, then it doesn't. Because consistency should be given extra weight here, both for editors who try and mimic other pages, and for readers who expect to find certain links in specific places, then either all scenarios or none should have it. Those links are much better suited in the bottom navigation template which most if not all of these translusions have.Gonnym (talk)14:04, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Obtrusive template which does not help to navigate articles on national UK elections. Better left to templates. Nothing more than a sidebar taking up space. For instance, on the 1802 United Kingdom general election article it appears next to the election infobox but in the middle in the top part of the article. And it appears like that for many articles. Navigation for election articles is best left for templates like navboxes. Plus, not everything needs a sidebar. We have alreadyTemplate:United Kingdom elections that covers the purpose of this sidebar already. Navboxes are doing the job well and sidebars like these are redundant Also, in terms of finding a way to click a link to these articles, one alternative is to click the link to the preceding or succeeding election articles from the infoboxes on these articles.WikiCleanerMan (talk)02:16, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sidebar template is much more easily accessible. These articles are often lengthy and that bottombox is rather overencumberedBejakyo (talk)17:44, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"The placement of a sidebar in the lead is generally discouraged; it may be included on a case-by-case basis, placed preferably after the lead-section image and infobox." There is enough navigation as it is already. Just because a navbox is all the way at the bottom does not mean its not accessible. This is redundant, plus more navigation isn't merited. Articles in these series are already found elsewhere on those articles plus the templates that link to them.WikiCleanerMan (talk)20:23, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As far as I can see this template is never in the lead, soWP:Leadsidebar would not apply in this case. It has not appeared in general election articles since 1987 and not in the MPs articles since 1931. There is no MPs navbox in the general election articles and vice versa.~2025-40604-97 (talk)07:30, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant sidebar-type template as the navboxTemplate:Opinion polling for United Kingdom elections is better served for navigation to articles about polls for UK elections. Plus, not everything needs a sidebar. Several UK general elections have their own navboxes that include links to opinion polling articles already. Navboxes are doing the job well and sidebars like these are redundant.WikiCleanerMan (talk)02:13, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sidebar template is much more easily accessible. These articles are often lengthy and that bottombox is rather overencumberedBejakyo (talk)17:44, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I use it all the time, especially to switch betweenOpinion polls andLeadership approval articles. More convenient than scrolling down the page (which is only going to get much longer).
The number of my edits is irrelevant. I have been using the articles in question for a long time and as auser I find the sidebar very useful. Is it likely that I'm the only one? You can call "finding something useful" a "personal preference" if you wish, but if people prefer to use the sidebar to navigate between related articles, that is hardly irrelevant. Whether you like it or not, I have as much right to express my view here as anyone else, whether as auser oreditor, and whether or not the account is temporary. I do not need to justify anything further, but for your information, since it appears to be important to you, I have made many edits, to various articles. As I'm sure you already know IP and TA numbers change frequently, automatically - I do not change them, nor do I have more than one at any one time. It just so happens this is a new one.~2025-40406-38 (talk)21:18, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The template is used in articles without infobox, so moving to previous or next election requires to use the bottombox. Furthermore, theWP:LEADSIDEBAR discouragementseems to aim primarily to topical sidebars, whereas the template in question carries specific references to previous/next entries of the same type of page.Hrhr2 (talk)17:10, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant to the main ISIS navbox. All these links can be covered by the navbox. If any links are missing, then they should be added. For as large as the navbox is already. A sidebar of this type does not aid in navigation and not everything needs a sidebar. Plus, there is really one article related to the history of ISIS, it is the main article. The rest are general topics.WikiCleanerMan (talk)19:12, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any missing links and delete. Editors who create this duplicate system don't realize that it makes maintaining these twice the work.Gonnym (talk)07:17, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I keep using it, and probably other people too, but we will never find out, because it is normally used in page previews only and it is not supposed to be transcluded in a page. --Grufo (talk)08:32, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnuniq: Documented how? It is adebug template, mostly used in preview pages, and in case someone transcludes it, they will remove it shortly afterwards. And if they don't remove it, an admin will, because the template is designed not to be permanently transcluded. --Grufo (talk)10:34, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
“The documentation for the template fails”: Then improve it. I always try to do my best. Sometimes that might not be enough.“If it is for use in previews, why is it designed to be substituted?”: After all this time you still don't know how substitution works? If a substitution template has this problematic call{{safesubst:<noinclude />Foobar|...}}, the{{Debug}} template willneed to support substitution too if you want to replace the wikitext above with{{safesubst:<noinclude />Debug|...}}. During your tests the{{Debug}} template will be substituted too. If it is an edit preview and you want to keep it that way, you will see the results of your tests by clicking on “Show changes” (not “Show preview”). --Grufo (talk)10:22, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note. What this template does is explained in the documentation
This is a debug template that echoes the arguments it was called with. You can easily spot errors in your code by temporarily replacing the name of a called template withdebug.
Ideally there should not be pages that permanently transclude this template.
This means that if there is, let's say, a problematic call to a{{FooBar}} template that generates errors, one must temporarily replace
Once the errors are solved, the{{Debug}} template can be removed. A naif workaround that does not require this template is that of temporarily replacing curly brackets with round brackets:
This however is less powerfull, because{{Debug}} takes care of escaping HTML entities and doing other quirks. As explained in the documentation, the template is not designed to have permanent transclusions. We cannot know how many users find it useful, because we have no way to know how much it is used. --Grufo (talk)10:57, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete orUserfy per Grufo. Templates that have no useful documentation for what it does, how it works or why it should exist should not be in template space as they are not useful to the public. Anything made for the public should be self-explanatory to use, or clearly documented. This is neither.Zinnober9 (talk)08:28, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, this template is not for me, it is a general debug template, and now it is also well documented. Because of the reasons explained above, there is no way to know who finds it useful; at least someone however found it useful here. Also, one of the requirements for deleting it (“no likelihood of being used”) is truly pretty unlikely in this case. --Grufo (talk)03:31, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are the only one using it as this TFD as been open for 17 days (more than your supposed 1 week automatic closure) and no one else has commented to keep because they use it. As has previously been said MANY times, this is not a code repository for code that may someday be useful. If YOU want to use it, then userfy it. If you don't want to use it, the simply delete is fine.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)16:03, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At this point it seems clear that neither of us will convince the other (if there has ever been any chance). I still did not understand on what ground you want do delete it, by the way. It seems to me that you old opening statement can no longer apply (“I see no scenario in which this template can be useful or used in any way”). So, what is the reason now?“This TFD as been open for 17 days”: Don't blame me, you asked others to discuss this template. --Grufo (talk)23:55, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misunderstood, or I wasn't clear. No complaint that it has been open for 17 days nor blame on anyone... My point was that you claim other are using it, but over 17 days no one has stepped forward to saydon't delete this, I too am using it... That was why I mentioned the 17 days. That and your previous assertions that TFDs are always closed after 7 days...Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)05:19, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, this template is used sporadically, because it is a debug tool. However, when a template breaks,{{Debug}} makes life a lot easier. It is also useful when you start a new template that uses subtemplates: you must begin from somewhere, and so normally you begin from the parent template; there, instead of transcluding{{/foobar|...}} (which does not exist yet), you transclude{{Debug|...}}, which gives you feedback on what you are doing. --Grufo (talk)15:29, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note to the closer. This is a developer tool useful for everyone; but if the majority believes differently, given that multiple users liked the idea, instead of deleting it I would like it to be moved as it is, with the documentation and the whole page history, to my user space, as User:Grufo/debug and User:Grufo/debug/doc. Thanks. --Grufo (talk)15:06, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Propose mergingTemplate:LDS Temple withTemplate:LDS Temple/. Not seeking to delete. But I notice there's dozens of single usage sub-page templates inside of of the category:
Each one is a single religious location's unique infobox. So it's like each LDS church has a unique infobox only for it's church article. Is there not an easier way to merge these all? Or does each article really need its own customized infobox template?CaribDigita (talk)02:04, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - Tried to do this before and it was rejected. You should not have separate subtemplates for each transclusion. This is absurd use of templates. The argument for it is that it also populates data in tables but there is no other template that does this bizarre syntax style. This is akin to having a separate subtemplate for every instance of{{Infobox building}} so you don't have to manually update pages likeList of tallest buildings. strongly support converting this to a standard infobox like all the others where the data is stored on the related articles and not in custom subtemplates.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)05:22, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep until there is a real plan to deal with the complex use of this family of templates. Look at the previous TFDs (some number of these templates are nominated every couple of years by people who have not delved into the complexity). Come up with a plan first, then demonstrate that it will work with all of the pages that use this family of templates. –Jonesey95 (talk)01:48, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonesey95 andGonnym: So the thing I still don't get is why a template is needed to store this information for use in multiple places. As I said above, this is like having hundreds of instances of{{Infobox building/SomeBuilding}} to maintain those articles AND theList of tallest buildings. The values that are repeated in multiple locations,do not change.
A map - here the GPS coordinates have to be manually put into the table already, they do NOT use the seprate infoboxes to get the coords
An image/link to temple's article - These tiny images really don't need to be there, but setting that aside, no need to pull them from another template. Just put regular wiki-markup and use the image. Obviously you can just use a regular wikilink for the Temple's name
Location - This is never going to change. No need to pull from another template.
Dedication date/Status - This is the only field that might need occasional updating
Floor area - This won't change unless a temple undergoes MAJOR renovations.
So what I am seeing is we have to maintain nearly 100 templates and the ONLY benefit is that in the event that a temple closes for renovation, or is finished being built, we only have to update 1 page instead of 2 (possibly 3 in rare cases). I just think the overhead maintenance and the violation of the spirit ofthe template namespace dramatically outweigh this tiny benefit.
I feel very strongly these should be converted to traditional infoboxes where the actual data is storeon the article pages, not in the template namespace. For all the above reasons, but also usability. If I want to change the president ofColumbus Ohio Temple, that change is done in the Template NS?? That makes very little sense to me... Also it doesn't work with tools likeTemplate Data Editor. Just so many problems for so little reward.
@Jonesey95: Thank you for correcting my mistake. Egg on my face for sure. I guess your point thatthis is a complex set of templates ... is exactly my point. This is overly complicated with very little reward. The fact that something that claims to be an Infobox is transcluded in 20+ places makes no sense to me. There is a reason that this sort of thing is not done anywhere else.
First, these template pages do not claim to be infoboxes. Template subpages likeTemplate:LDS Temple/Los Angeles California Temple are used in 20+ pages; they state at the top that they are "Data for lists and infobox", which is very different. And yes, the infobox parameter check situation, and this whole clever set of templates and data tables, is quite confusing, thus a reason to consider any merge proposal and design very carefully, well before the templates are put in the holding cell. There might be a better way to prevent this sort of accidental parameter check deletion in the future, such as hiding parameters used in another template in a noinclude section or a display:none section of the infobox template. I'm happy to discuss those possibilities on the infobox template's talk page. –Jonesey95 (talk)18:01, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok that's fair. You are correct, they don't claim to be infoboxes. That is an inaccurate statement on my part and I retract it. I guess my point is that the fact that this is all so confusing is a reason for it to be changed, not a reason to keep it.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)19:18, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
until there is a real plan to deal with the complex use of this family of templates - I thought I was pretty clear. If the templates are subst into the article, then{{Template parameter value}} can work. That template has examples in its doc to show how.Gonnym (talk)13:37, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can 100% get behindFrietjes' idea... Would be a major improvement.Jonesey95 what do you think of that idea? I think this accomplishes both our concerns:
My desires to get this data out of the template namespace and increase readability/understanding
Your concern that the data needs to stay centralized such that it can be used in multiple locations.
Happy to make this happen if this is a plan people can get behind.
I think that would be the only reasonable way to do it.Module:Adjacent stations also comes to mind. I am not a programmer, so I don't know which sort of structure would work better for this project. One nice thing about the proposal is that it could be developed in parallel with the existing pages and templates, and demonstrated in a series of tests until it matches the existing system. I caution against closing this TFD as "merge" or "delete" without a replacement being built and demonstrated first. It's probably best to close it as "no consensus". –Jonesey95 (talk)02:10, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would say we could close it as merge with a clear note saying reliant on a working Module replacement. There is precedent here with{{Infobox ship}} which has been in the holding cell for 3 and a half years... At least then it makes clear we are working towards a better solution. In any event, I def support this new approach!Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)06:35, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete or use Frietjes's idea for a data sub-module. This complexity isn't needed. I've shown above that the only thing it does, it gets a "status" value. For that reason I don't even think a sub-module is needed, as that makes these infoboxes just like any other infobox. Would we create a sub-module for schools, just because we want to get the "status" of the school also? But I'm "fine" with that idea as it still reduces dozens of unnecessary templates from our system and makes editing in this topic easier.Gonnym (talk)13:40, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unused template with no clear use case where you would need to manipulate a string in this fashion. This is particularly true for the case where you would supposedly substitute the template... Just change the characters before you paste the string. This requires so much more work.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)08:06, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We virtually have no alternative ways to do the same on English Wikipedia. The only other theoretical possibility isModule:MultiReplace, however that is the perfect example ofwhat not to do in order to accomplish what this template has been designed for – for instance, create a{{Unicode italic}} template with the following content:
The use case as a substitution template is that of a meta-substitution (i.e. templates for substitution that use this template need to be able to use it as a substitution template). More in general, this template is the way to go when we want two map two different alphabets. --Grufo (talk)21:59, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - yeah - you could use it, in fact. If you want to transliterate text from, say, Greek to English. But per nom., it is just too much work, and doesn't have any clear benefit over just doing it yourself. That is presumably why it is unused.Sirfurboy🏄 (talk)22:02, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You really don't want to write manually
{{Abbr|Lorem ipsum|𝘓𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘮 𝘪𝘱𝘴𝘶𝘮 is a lovely sentence}}
You'd rather write:
{{Abbr|Lorem ipsum|{{subst:uitalic|Lorem ipsum}} is a lovely sentence}}
We have no other way to show italicized text or similar things inside the popup message of templates like{{Abbr}}. Italic characters are one example. Then we have monospace characters, then we have bold characters, and then we have—especially in math formulas—fraktur characters, and so on. --Grufo (talk)22:15, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your point of view. I really do. But try to transcend yourself, and think that a person even less skilled than you will tell you one day “We don't need these two apostrophes here you keep using to write italic characters. We don't need to write italic characters. I never needed to write italic characters in a page in my life.” --Grufo (talk)22:51, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, you mean in the tooltip. Well, okay, what you suggest would work, so I'll strike my delete. Not moving to a keep, though, as no one has seen fit to actually use this for such purposes, and as other solutions exist to insert the unicode in such very limited cases (and as tooltips can't be displayed in main text, it is all a bit meta), I'm unconvinced, but neither is it doing any harm.Sirfurboy🏄 (talk)23:13, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are really many nice use cases for this template, especially in math and languages. For instance, imagine you have theuitalic template above and a template namedusup with the following content:
{{abbr|{{mvar|G}}|{{subst:uitalic|G}} is the gravitational constant, i.e. 6.6743 × 10{{subst:usup|-11}} m{{subst:usup|3}} kg{{subst:usup|-1}} s{{subst:usup|-2}}}}
Of course we can already do that by hand. But do we really want to do it by hand? Then if we move to languages the use cases will go beyond the{{Abbr}} template (i.e. transliterating alphabets, removing/adding diacritics, and so on). --Grufo (talk)10:01, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "by hand"? We usually write6.6743 × 10<sup>-11</sup> m<sup>3</sup> kg<sup>-1</sup> s<sup>-2</sup> to get 6.6743 × 10-11 m3 kg-1 s-2. (P.S.: And we could write{{times}} to get × .) —Chrisahn (talk)13:09, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonesey95: I totally agree with the MOS, but I also think that the MOS does not go as far as forbidding the only way to express something in specific situations. Also, as explained earlier, this template is not limited to the superscript Unicode characters and the italic Unicode characters shown above. For instance, I am quite persuaded that the MOS has nothing against thefraktur characters used in math, or against other types of transliterations or alphabets. --Grufo (talk)13:39, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonesey95: Here is a MOS-compliant example (it is a substitution template—let's call it{{subst:bfrakt}}):
Given ideals{{math|{{subst:bfrakt|a}},{{subst:bfrakt|b}}}} of a commutative ring{{mvar|R}}, the{{mvar|R}}-annihilator of{{math|({{subst:bfrakt|b}} +{{subst:bfrakt|a}})/{{subst:bfrakt|a}}}} is an ideal of{{mvar|R}} called the[[ideal quotient]] of{{math|{{subst:bfrakt|a}}}} by{{math|{{subst:bfrakt|b}}}} and is denoted by{{math|({{subst:bfrakt|a}} :{{subst:bfrakt|b}})}}; it is an instance of[[idealizer]] in commutative algebra.
which generates:
Given ideals𝖆, 𝖇 of a commutative ringR, theR-annihilator of(𝖇 + 𝖆)/𝖆 is an ideal ofR called theideal quotient of𝖆 by𝖇 and is denoted by(𝖆 : 𝖇); it is an instance ofidealizer in commutative algebra.
This is basically an outline for an article, not a proper use of a template. If a user or project wants to make this page and use it to create articles that is one thing, but this def doesn't belong in the template namespace.Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)21:06, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will restate some of what I said at the other TFD that Pppery linked to:
This opens the door to literally thousands of article outline templates that are not appropriate uses of templates. Why just Saskatchewan communities? Next one for each province in Canada?{{Infobox settlement}} alone has 31 wrappers (seeCategory:Templates calling Infobox settlement (30)). If this template exists, why not create one for each of those places? What about settlements in general? Then the 2,200+ different infoboxes we have on wikipedia (seeintitle:/Infobox/i -intitle:/\//).
I will further point out that the body of the template has not been updated since 2018 and means you are inserting stale reference andin multiple cases broken links into new articles if you use this template. If this is going to exist in ANY form (as a template, or a wikiproject page) it needs to be maintained, which it clearly is not being.
I would hazard a guess that this was created bySriMesh back in 2007 to help with setting up new articles about communities inSaskatchewan... Isanyone else using it? SriMesh hasn't edited in multiple years... I doubt this template is even in use. Additionally, how often are new communities in Saskatchewan popping up? At this point I would imagine there is pretty universal coverage on Wikipedia (certainly more so than there was in 2007 when this was created).Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing)03:50, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: do we have any information on this template. Has this been used? Is this still being used? Has the template been updated to keep up with MoS and template changes or does it contain outdated stuff? My problem with these article templates is that if they get outdated, we end up with bad articles we need to fix, and if they are not used, we end up with a huge maintenance burden for no value.Gonnym (talk)08:26, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or transform it into a preaload page. This should definitely not be a template but apreload page for generating new pages (and as such it should be used, with a few adjustments, in conjunction with an<inputbox> where to type the name of the new pages to create). It seems however that most people are not familiar with preload pages on English Wikipedia, so a substitution template can work fine as a workaround. In both cases the template namespace is the correct namespace. In English “article outline” is basically a synonym of “template”, so I don't see where the problem is on that front. --Grufo (talk)19:43, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for those edits. Given thatKorean People's Army Strategic Force exists and the flag template is easy to display, it seems that someone might want to use this flag. It is straightforward enough to make{{flag icon|North Korea/sandbox|strategic force}} work with a|var= parameter, however, and there are hardly any strategic forces with flags listed atCategory:Strategic forces, so I don't think a new{{Strategic force}} template is necessary. I hope this makes sense. –Jonesey95 (talk)15:32, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
there are currently four countries that have established strategic rocket forces as independent branches (China,NK,Russia andSaudi Arabia), each with its own flag, which are actually more than the number of existing independent space forces, hence I see no reason why it's unnecessary if the one for space forces is.
Lots of strategic rocket forces were established pretty recently, such as theChinese one which was separated from the army less than 10 years ago. I am personally optimistic about a potential future growth.Belarus101 (talk)20:56, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So then, like the space forces, the strategic forces are new and growing things. When I think of a strategic force, I think ofSAC, which is a major command in theUSAF. In light of your words my opinion is to keep this template.P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 06:25, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unused (not transcluded) template that is linked to from a few category pages. If this is a help page and is still needed, it should be converted to one (moved to the help namespace with the redirect deleted). If it isn't needed, it should be deleted.Gonnym (talk)07:04, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say it wasn't a T5able case, but that I would decline a T5. My reason is as above. Just because something qualifies for a criterion doesn't mean it should be deleted for such.Izno (talk)05:52, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found atthe "Holding Cell".
, and then select "XFD".)
Comment: Do not delete this without searching for pages which contain this template without a Talk header. The main redundancy argument is only true on pages with both templates.CapnZapp (talk)13:33, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=link}
