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. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 17:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Fringe Theory (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This just is not a useful template. We have other templates that do this much better than this one. Template:Pseudoscience, for example. jps (talk) 22:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as redundant. Biogeographist (talk) 01:45, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, redundant and done better by other templates. Crossroads ^-talk- 03:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Indeed unnecessary, we have ((Pseudoscience)) and while fringe theories has a wider scope, non-pseudoscientific conspiracy theories are still usually in other related templates, like the ((Antisemitism)) sidebar, etc. —PaleoNeonate – 02:32, 21 January 2021 (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 2021 February 1. Primefac (talk) 01:37, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Inoi-Chalkis_Line (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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Oinoi–Chalcis railway diagram (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to ((Inoi-Chalkis Line)). AlgaeGraphix (talk) 17:26, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, see my comment above. Markussep ^Talk 08:06, 18 January 2021 (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 delete. As this is a discussion about retaining an unused template, a rationale should be given as to why this template is likely to be used. Editors in support of retention largely didn't make arguments regarding the template, but rather about the war. Editors in favour of deletion made arguments surrounding the redundancy of the template and the availability of better constructed alternatives, and these arguments were not rebutted. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:30, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Cyprus dispute detailed map (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is a war map template. However, there is no war in Cyprus. The map has not been edited in about 3 years (because nothing is happening), except for 2 edits by User:Pppery (one to tag it with Tfd and another to undo his own edit 7 minutes later). As of now, the map doesn't show anything contested. All the map shows is that Cyprus is divided into North Cyprus and South Cyprus. This has been the case since 1974. All this does not warrant a war map template for Cyprus. There is no updating taking place. The Cyprus template should have never been created. It is important to delete this template because many people might put more time and effort into it. In any case, I have the code saved on my computer if there is ever a war in Cyprus and we need to re-create this template. Finally, I want to note that I am also nominating the associated module for deletion as well: Module:Cyprus dispute detailed map. Tradedia^talk 20:32, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. As for my previous edits, I was doing a TfD of several rarely-used modules, and then reverted myself because I decided I didn't understand how war map modules worked well enough to nominate them for deletion. Now that someone who does understand them has done so, I agree it should be deleted. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:36, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The fact that the war is stale, does not mean there is no war. Debresser (talk) 16:57, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  This is still useless as a template; it isn't linked to or transcluded in any article, and it hasn't been updated in years. The third and subsequent sentences of the nomination are still valid. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:19, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Debresser. That's why it's called "Cyprus dispute" - not a "war"; the dispute is undeniably still active. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:13, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per comments above, unless the Cyprus dispute is completely resolved I think that keeping it for now is pretty useful. Even though its inactive because of a deadly virus or some political shenanigan, I think it should be kept in the meanwhile because it is an ongoing dispute not an ongoing war. PyroFloe (talk) 13:31, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per comments above, the war and ongoing division are still relevant, so a map like this is as well. Otebig (talk) 01:00, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This template has no transclusions and a picture like File:Cyprus_districts_named.png which is used at Cyprus dispute seems to be more appropriate since it more clearly shows who control what area and does not include any of the irrelevant and unused items in the caption such as "Strategic hill" and "Industrial complex". --Trialpears (talk) 12:09, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Trialpears. The other map is useable and clear, unlike this one. Nigej (talk) 18:22, 19 January 2021 (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 delete. (non-admin closure) ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:1948 United States presidential election imagemap (AH) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused "alternative history" template. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 00:45, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Struggling to see any point in it. Unused. Nigej (talk) 07:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I see no reason why said template should be retained. As Nigej pointed out, it is also unused and serves no apparent purpose. Lord Stephenson (talk) 09:41, 20 January 2021 (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).