The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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).
Unused ToC template, but even if it were, the extra parameter option could have been added to Template:TOC US states, like all other the template parameters, as there is no need for a separate template to do that. Gonnym (talk) 18:01, 15 June 2019 (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).
Template:Road marker PK NH
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:38, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
delete, not needed. Frietjes (talk) 14:35, 20 June 2019 (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 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 keep. As a note, while templates do not necessarily require references for their content, the placement of links in a navbox such as this does need to be verified somewhere on Wikipedia. There is opposition to deletion of this template but if its contents cannot be verified then they should be removed. Primefac (talk) 03:46, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly original research, see WP:OR. There is no WP:RS which could verify these entries, no official site either. Template is too long for comfortable navigation and is better navigable using its complementary category. Störm(talk) 16:05, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose complete deletion - Pride of Performance has an article and in it the lead says that it is one of the awards conferred by the Government of Pakistan on Pakistani civilians in recognition of distinguished meritorious work in the fields of literature, arts, sports, medicine, and science. I've looked to see if the United States has a comparable award, which it does: National Medal of Arts. This award also has navigation templates such as ((National Medal of Arts recipients 1980s)). Since this is clearly an accepted practice, then maybe splitting this template into 2 smaller ones and removing the duplicate links to the years will make it more easier to read. --Gonnym (talk) 17:57, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gonnym Not my problem. I was saying that there is no source or accompanying article to support the template. It is purely based on original research per WP:OR.Störm(talk) 01:51, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose deletion I have been editing Wikipedia for more than 6 years now and I mostly edit Pakistan-related articles. I personally try my best to first back up with WP:RS each listed award every time I list a Pride of Performance Award for a person in the main body of the article. I mostly use newspaper references considered 'reliable' by Wikipedia. Only then, I later install the above subject template at the article. In light of my 6 years editing experience on Wikipedia, I can say that most listed Pride of Performance awards are already backed up with references. In case they are missing on occasional articles, they can be tagged as 'Citation needed', thus giving people a chance to provide a reference and improve the articles. Ngrewal1 (talk) 18:52, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Personally, I don't have any NAVIGATIONAL problems on the above template. Wikipedia software automatically makes the award-winner's name BOLDED among the list of other winners' names. Anybody can SPOT it instantly because it's BOLDED. As we all know, back-up references are given in the main body of the award-winner's Wikipedia article and NOT within this above template. For example, see one award-winner Tina Sani's article. Ngrewal1 (talk) 14:41, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Störm Even this above list now has many references. Replaced 1 dead link and added 3 new ones. Ngrewal1 (talk) 17:42, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A template is not supposed to have references. That's for the article. Templates are for navigational purpose only. Mar4d (talk) 02:37, 20 June 2019 (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).