The result of the discussion was relisted here. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 02:21, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
I've just made an improvement to ((details)) so that it supports multiple pages as part of its list, that is:
((details|PAGE1|TOPIC))
→ ((details|topic=TOPIC|PAGE1))
→
and it's now possible to do ((details|topic=TOPIC|PAGE1|PAGE2|PAGE3))
→
and similar.
Previous cases have used ((details3)) to implement lists with multiple pages:
((details3|[[PAGE1]] and [[PAGE2]]))
→
Using ((details)) with a list of multiple pages is more elegant, and applies a set of standard improvements through its Lua implementation. We should migrate uses of ((details3)) to use ((details)) instead, delete ((details3)), and therefore simplify the hatnote system. ((For-on-see)) is along for the ride because it is a single-use meta-template for ((details3)); it had 4 standalone uses which I've already replaced with ((details)).
TfD regulars may recognize this hatnote system cleanup as a bit of a project of mine; previous similar TfDs have included About3 & About4 and Redirect6. ((Nihiltres |talk |edits)) 20:13, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Request withdrawn (non-admin closure) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 15:22, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Each navbox has a section that states the previous class and a successive class, which is what ((s-start)), ((s-bef)), ((s-ttl)), ((s-aft)), ... are used for. The navboxes are sequential, and lists a number of ships that fall into each class, which are minimal. Suggesting merging these navboxes into one. If the user needs help setting up the preceeding/successive cruiser classes, I'd volunteer to help out. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 05:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
To elaborate, I suggest replacing the navboxes with a cumulative one, something like Special:Permalink/725204677. The succession boxes at the bottom is not meant to be part of the template. It's a just a demo. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 06:36, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete as unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 02:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Unused/no transclusions, very narrow in scope (photos only?), and potentially even misleading - overly simplifies the relevant Ethiopian laws (see Commons version) FASTILY 01:49, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete as unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 02:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Unused/no transclusions, potentially misleading, redundant to ((PD-Malaysia))
. See also: c:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-MalaysiaGov FASTILY 01:45, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete as unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 02:20, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Unused/no transclusions, does not exist on Commons, easily replaced by ((PD-simple))
FASTILY 01:28, 14 June 2016 (UTC)