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. ✗plicit 00:39, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Plumbum (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused chemical element symbol that should have gone into 2021-11-23 # Individually formatted element templates. I couldn't find it at the time because the name is in Latin and I think it is too late to add it to the previous TfD. User:GKFX^talk 20:19, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Had this been in use at the time, users would have kept correcting it to the maintenance tag redirect ((lead)). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:19, 1 December 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. Izno (talk) 05:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Largest cities of Canada (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Cape Verde (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Castile and León (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Catalonia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Central Asia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Cherkasy Oblast (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Chernivtsi Oblast (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Colombia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Costa Rica (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Djibouti (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Donetsk Oblast (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Ecuador (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Egypt (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of El Salvador (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Eritrea (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Estonia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Finland (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of France (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Galmudug (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Gandaki Province (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Georgia (country) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Greenland (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Guinea (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Haiti (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Honduras (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Hungary (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Iceland (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of India (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Jamaica (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Karnali Province (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Kazakhstan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Kenya (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Kyrgyzstan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Laos (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Lebanon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Luhansk Oblast (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Lumbini Province (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Luxembourg (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest Cities of Maharashtra (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest administrative units of Malta (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) and redirect Template:Largest cities of Malta (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Mongolia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Montenegro (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Mozambique (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Myanmar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Namibia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Nicaragua (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Niger (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of North Asia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of North Macedonia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Largest cities of Northern Cyprus (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

These are all single-use tables which could be easily merged with the parent article. There is no need to keep the table outside of the article when it could be included in the article directly. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:06, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Subst and delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:45, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Subst and delete all per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• substitute and delete, single-use tables. Frietjes (talk) 20:42, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Question – Is there a guideline about single-use table templates? Could someone link it? What if we imagine other likely uses, such as an article Largest cities of Southeast Asia? Does creating that article and making a second use for some of these templates cause a change of outcome here? Or some? Or all? Dicklyon (talk) 19:09, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep – I went ahead and created that article, which uses a couple of these table among others. Seeing how many such table templates already have multiple uses, I'm inclined to oppose getting rid of these. But if there's a relevant policy guideline, show me. Dicklyon (talk) 05:33, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  seems like a non-standard article, the only other one that I could find was Largest cities of northeastern Brazil which has a single table with all of the cities in the region (all the others are more like List of cities in Australia by population). but, if you are going to write an article about the "largest cities of Southeast Asia" you should put all the results together in one table, and not have all the individual country tables. Frietjes (talk) 17:21, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Agreed, it's a crappy article and I'll ask to delete it. Looking at other largest cities templates, however, I found why most of them are referenced from multiple places; just need to update this template to include the single-use ones (at least the ones that are countries):

So yes, I still oppose deleting these until we decide whether this would be an appropriate use for them. And I reiterate my request for any background or guideline on why we might prefer to delete single-use table templates. Dicklyon (talk) 18:28, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

the content won't be deleted, just merged with the parent article. as far as guidelines go, see the first bullet. a table is effectively article text and makes it harder to edit, harder to monitor since the content is in more than one place. there is a reason why we don't have separate template for every table in every article. Frietjes (talk) 18:34, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Got it; thanks. But before we proceed, let's consider whether the template above ought to include some of these, so we don't create more work to put them back later. I'm not sure how to even go about editing that one. Dicklyon (talk) 18:45, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Triggerhippie4: who displayed knowledge of how these things are used in a previous deletion discussion. Dicklyon (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep templates for countries, as they are part of a series. Virtually every country has one of those. They are often used in article about the country, plus in "Demographics of [COUNTRY]" and in "Geography of [COUNTRY]". The templates listed here may also be useful the same way in the future. It would be inconsistent to have such templates for most countries but not for the others. As for the templates for non-country entities, they can be substituted and deleted, in my opinion, since they are most likely not going to be used anywhere else. Also, @Plastikspork: you haven't notified about a dozen creators of the nominated templates. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 06:04, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I just added some of these templates to other articles, so about twenty of them are now included in more than one article. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 10:21, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  How to proceed now? It might be best to prune out the ones that are countries, or no longer single-use; or split this into two discussions where we're likely to keep one set and subst/delete the other? Failing that, I'd re-vote Keep all. Dicklyon (talk) 01:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete all. These aren't navigation templates but article content in a table format. These should not be used as navigation templates at the bottom of articles, but as tables in a section of an article. These tables should only be used at the most relevant article - such as a country article or a list of cities in country article. They should not be used multiple times in country pages, nor added to specific cities as navboxes or even tables (such as at Sumgait) nor in general pages like Urban area. Gonnym (talk) 09:56, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym: They are not used as navigational templates at the bottom of articles. These are content templates added as lists of cities in the middles of articles. If they are subst and deleted, it would add the same code multiple times in different pages, which will not be as easy to update as it is now. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 10:26, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously know they are used as navigation templates at the bottom of articles seeing as how you just removed it from Sumgait. If they are subst and deleted, it would add the same code multiple times in different pages why would it? The tables should only be at one article. Why would we duplicate information over and over again? The table should only be at the most specific article. Gonnym (talk) 13:26, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym: The template I removed from Sumgait isn't even nominated here. What it has to do with this nominated? After you pointed at it I removed it because it's not supposed to be there. And why each list of cities can only be in one article? Most of the templates is used in more than one article. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 20:00, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicating (WP:CONTENTFORK) information on multiple articles is bad writing. Demographics of Germany#cities just uses the template without any prose text referencing its data, while Germany#Demographics mentions only Berlin. Ideally, the table should be in Demographics of Germany#cities, where its data is mentioned in depth. As it currently is, Germany#Demographics could be without the table and nothing would be lost, as it has a ((Main)) link to the Demographics page. Gonnym (talk) 20:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym: Germany#Demographics could be without the table and nothing would be lost What a statement. An article about a country is absolutely benefiting from a list of it's largest cities, this is common sense. When someone reads a comprehensive article about an entire country, they expect to see a list of cities. That's why almost every country article has it. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 20:39, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What then with so many others, like Template:Largest cities of New Zealand that's used on 2 articles, and Template:Largest cities of Germany that's used on 3? Dicklyon (talk) 18:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete all. This is article content, not really a template at all, and is the sort of information that should only be in one article, in this case generally the country article I would suggest (or perhaps "demographics of"). If its in 2 or more articles at the moment then it almost certainly shouldn't be. We have wikilinks if we need to direct readers to information held in other articles. Duplicating content (even by using such a "template") is rarely a good idea. Nigej (talk) 11:35, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning delete. This series of templates has slowly been created and added to various country articles as they are seen on one page and so created just so the other country page also has one. This imposes a consistency that doesn't reflect reality, the Largest Cities of Canada may be WP:DUE prominence due to their spread and the concentration of the population, the Largest Cities of Cape Verde less so. If the templates are removed, and the information is due and relevant, it is likely a table will be created. Deleting them is also not going to delete any unique content, given they are all just names and numbers. CMD (talk) 12:13, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• lots missing here.over 200...as many use difference criteria eg Template:Largest urban agglomerations in Brazil. Make work project for content editors by others with zero benefits for readers.Moxy- 12:46, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Moxy: Very few countries use other kind of templates like Brazil. Most countries missing here because they are present in more than one article and therefore weren't nominated (and since this nomination was posted I've also added about half of the templates here to other articles so they are no longer single-use). --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 13:47, 6 December 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. Izno (talk) 02:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Manitoba Interlake (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:14, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, pertinent, used. TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 01:47, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unused and the main Manitoba template can easily do the job. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:06, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  What about this template, and others: Template:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Manitoba_Eastern. Advice of creator of those templates (user:Awmcpheeshould) should be asked at least. Delete or merge for pure negative ideology. Uncreating and destroying. Thats what this user is about too. And he's proud of it. Shameful. TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 05:01, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  TheGreenGiant23, if you're accusing me of being proud of so-called "destroying" or the nominator, then you are certainly not helping with this discussion, and your responses can be subject of an ANI discussion. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:08, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:15, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:10, 28 November 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. ✗plicit 11:40, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:New Zealand welcome (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:New Zealand welcome2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Both are no longer used by the project and instead use the subst format when inviting users to the project. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the templates contain instructions for subst'ing the templates. So, is it no longer used? I don't see a discussion at WT:NZ discussion the non-use of these two welcome templates ? It was proposed at WT:NZ in 2006 to use these templates, but I don't see a deprecation discussion -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 01:54, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For substituted uses of these templates see [1]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:21, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:07, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. [2] (sorted by creation data) suggests that the first template was last used (once) in 2014 and four times in 2013. The second was last used 2010 by my reading of [3]. User:GKFX^talk 20:14, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both per GKFX. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:00, 28 November 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 December 7. Izno (talk) 05:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Prothom_Alo_-_This_debt_of_yours_will_not_be_repaid (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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) –Piranha249 (Discuss with me) 21:34, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:WarnerMedia Studios & Networks (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:WarnerMedia News & Sports (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:WarnerMedia Studios & Networks with Template:WarnerMedia News & Sports.
Consolidate all things WarnerMedia into a singular template, similar to Disney and NBCU, et al. –Piranha249 (Discuss with me) 21:39, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge News and Sports into Studios and Networks. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:46, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. These giant abomination templates need to be split, not combined. A reader browsing one of the pages at Template:WarnerMedia News & Sports is more than likely not searching for information on The Wizarding World of Harry Potter. Just because eventually they are both from the same company, does not mean the navbox should be the same. Gonnym (talk) 14:27, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget The Template:WarnerMedia Studios & Networks is ok as it is and is embedded into the main AT&T template as a child template in the WarnerMedia section. The Template:WarnerMedia News & Sports was carved out from the AT&T template which was unnecessary. Piranha249, WarnerMedia News & Sports is not part of the WarnerMedia Studios & Networks, so this merge has an incorrect target template. I recommend WarnerMedia News & Sports being merged back into the AT&T template in the WarnerMedia section, thoughts? Steven (Editor) (talk) 00:26, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Maybe they should both be merged into the AT&T template since both templates for WarnerMedia, which is itself owned by AT&T, and thus we don't need more individual templates. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:06, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  "unnecessary" according to who exactly? Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 February 2#Template:AT&T concluded otherwise. Gonnym (talk) 11:58, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Steven (Editor), What I meant was, in this sense, merge these two, and an additional navbox on other divisions, into one template. Besides, once the Discovery merger is done, the navbox won't be on Template:AT&T. –Piranha249 (Discuss with me) 17:29, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:00, 28 November 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 December 6. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 07:15, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Alpbaşıs_of_the_Kayı_tribe_(Diriliş:_Ertuğrul_and_Kuruluş:_Osman) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Beys_of_the_Çavdar_tribe_(Diriliş:_Ertuğrul) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Beys_of_the_Kayı_tribe_(Diriliş:_Ertuğrul_and_Kuruluş:_Osman) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Hanıms_of_the_Kayı_tribe_(Diriliş:_Ertuğrul_and_Kuruluş:_Osman) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Tekfurs_of_Karacahisar_(Diriliş:_Ertuğrul) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Uç_Beys_of_the_Sultanate_of_Rum_(Diriliş:_Ertuğrul_and_Kuruluş:_Osman) (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) 18:42, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:MED (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template adds a MOS:EGG external link in the middle of an article, without the reader even knowing it is an external link. From the two pages it is used on, it would seem the intention is for it to be a citation. If that is the case, then usages should be converted to one of the available citation template. There is no need for this for such low usages. If on the other hand, the intention is for it to be an EL, then it should be removed from the middle of the article where it is located and moved to the actual EL section, and reformatted as a clear, non-EGG EL. Gonnym (talk) 21:18, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, I barely remember why I copied this over from the Spanish-language Wikipedia. Probably its lack of existence was causing something to break in an article which had been translated from Spanish. If we can get rid of it or work around it, I'm all for it. Cheers, GentlemanGhost (séance) 21:37, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More specifically, I believe I copied the template to facilitate this edit by Opus88888 (talk · contribs). The MED template did not exist here at EN and unpacking each URL suffix individually would have been laborious, so I simply copied it over from ES. If another template can be substituted for it, that sounds ideal. --GentlemanGhost (séance) 12:02, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:45, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment if this is kept, it should be renamed to ((medieval.org)) -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 03:50, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:56, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. As I suspected, it was indeed laborious to convert all the citations which used this template, but that is now done. No articles currently use this template, so it can be safely eliminated. Cheers, GentlemanGhost (séance) 17:06, 28 November 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 December 6. Izno (talk) 14:43, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Load_user_script (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Js (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) 15:49, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Methyl (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused chemical symbol template that makes the (often undesirable) decision to link to carbon and hydrogen separately. Should use ((chem2|CH3)) or similar which gives free choice over linking. User:GKFX^talk 13:28, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Built with a template that is itself in the process of being deleted. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:36, 1 December 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 December 5. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 12:29, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Fixcaps (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Str_case_title_word (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. ✗plicit 11:39, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:PD-TLD (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-TLD. Brianjd (talk) 06:03, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fake license, likely original research. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:21, 5 December 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 December 6. Izno (talk) 14:42, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Archery_at_the_2021_Junior_Pan_American_Games (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) 23:04, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Orava Parish (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The navigation box is not used anymore. Flying Saucer (talk) 01:57, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Parish no longer exists. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:00, 28 November 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).