The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. If someone wants this to use on a different wiki/location, they are welcome to request it be sent to them. Primefac (talk) 19:48, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Module:Wordify (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

15 months after my prior TfD nomination, the speculation about the future that lead it to be kept has not borne out. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:17, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This module is used by several templates. Trigenibinion (talk) 00:06, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Special:WhatLinksHere/Module:Wordify shows no such use, only an ancient experiment. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:44, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Someone broke another module and locked it. A temporary workaround was put in place until that is fixed. Trigenibinion (talk) 08:46, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Trigenibinion: Can you provide an example of one of those modules? —C.Fred (talk) 21:41, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is Module:Formatnum. It cannot be #invoke'd (originally conditionally called with Wordify in Template:FXConvert). The FXConvert sandbox has been tested with the Formatnum sandbox which has the proper fix. Trigenibinion (talk) 21:56, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the user who locked Formatnum abandoned Wikipedia after being sanctioned. Trigenibinion (talk) 09:58, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:33, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep non-trivial module. Trigenibinion (talk) 21:16, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The English Wikipedia is not a template repository. The technical complexity of a module has nothing to do with whether it should be deleted for lack of use. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:38, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Transwiki? This almost seems like it belongs on Meta, but I don't know enough about Meta's template policy to know whether a module like this would be beneficial there. (It doesn't seem like the English Wikipedia is a good fit for it.) If it would be appropriate on Meta, I suggest moving it there. --ais523 10:01, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Meta seems, from my understanding, to have very few people who care about templates, but, as long as it's still has no meaningful use it would IMO be just as out-of-scope on Meta as it is here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 12:57, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Can you use Meta templates from Wikipedia? This was created to be called here. Trigenibinion (talk) 09:46, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. --Izno (talk) 03:28, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. In the year since the last nomination no-one has found a use for this, and most of the functionality of this template is not useful in an English language project. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 12:26, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  There is already a use for this, as shown above. And this template was designed to be common across Wikipedias. Trigenibinion (talk) 12:44, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:55, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Arab Swimming Championships (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Two links. Fails NENAN. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:13, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:44, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep it's about a credible competition. --Fayçal.09 (talk) 21:37, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:44, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Since the nomination a third article was created. But it still qualifies for deletion unless two more articles are created, but upon further examination, there is no mainspace article for the Arab Swimming Championships, which navboxes are supposed to have. The navbox still qualifies for deletion. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:55, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The Arab Swimming Championships was created. Regards. --Fayçal.09 (talk) 11:05, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is still two links short to pass the rule of thumb. Two articles don't exist yet, 2012 and 2014. The title page does not factor in the rule of thumb for five links minimum necessary for a navbox. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:27, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep.Montell 74 (talk) 16:20, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please state a rationale along with your vote. Nobody knows if you're arguing to keep because you're the creator of the template or if you're arguing since articles exist for the subject, that it merits keeping and even though at the moment, there aren't five articles minimum. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:27, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• weak keep, links four articles which would be more cumbersome to accomplish with see also links. Frietjes (talk) 22:37, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was relisted on 2022 August 1. Izno (talk) 03:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Domino_Unicode (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Module:Domino_Unicode (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:55, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Trails series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Originally split from Template:The Legend of Heroes by myself but I now believe all the content here can belong there again without issue. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 13:47, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:57, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, there seems to be no reason for multiple templates here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:23, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per nom. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 19:32, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).