Template:Clinical dosage ranges of oral and injectable androgens and anabolic steroids
- 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. ✗plicit 23:43, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Recently unused. Should be substituted on a relevant space. If not, then delete. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:49, 3 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 July 10. ✗plicit 23:44, 10 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).
Template:Provincial ministries of Pakistan
- 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. ✗plicit 11:58, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Contains only a redirect. No navigation. Asked the creator about his intentions, but did not receive a response. Can be userified since it seems to be a work in progress. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 14:55, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:17, 3 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).
Template:Taxonomy/Aeluroscalabotinae
- 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 as G6 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:13, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unused taxonomy template. This subfamily does not have an article, it is not mentioned in the source cited on the page, and it is not mentioned on the target species page. This template does not appear to be usable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:14, 3 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).
Template:Dakota 400
- 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 14:24, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No longer needed as Dakota 400 has the map as part of the infobox. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 13:48, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nomination. –Aidan721 (talk) 12:26, 10 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).
Template:Newcastle Transport light rail station
- 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 11:44, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A huge navigation template, used on a single page, with a single unique link Newcastle Light Rail. Until the network actually gets more station articles, there is no need for this template. Gonnym (talk) 09:51, 3 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).
Template:S-line/Arriva Stoptrein left/36800
- 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 11:44, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unused and superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Arriva Stoptrein. Gonnym (talk) 09:18, 3 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).
Template:S-line/Adelaide left/Dry Creek-Port Adelaide
- 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 11:44, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unused and superseded by Module:Adjacent stations/Adelaide Metro. Gonnym (talk) 09:16, 3 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).
Template:Weightlifting links
- 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 11:45, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unused external link template. Gonnym (talk) 09:07, 3 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).
Template:NYCS Platform Layout 161st Street-Yankee Stadium Station
- 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 11:45, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unused New York City Subway platform layout templates. Gonnym (talk) 09:04, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete ((NYCS Platform Layout Broadway Junction Station)) and ((NYCS Platform Layout 161st Street-Yankee Stadium Station)). Delete the BMT Jamaica Line J express templates; while skip-stop service on the J/Z (New York City Subway service) has only temporarily been suspended, I have merged these with other templates, so these will no longer be used. Epicgenius (talk) 16:43, 3 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).
Template:Maritsa Platis
- 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 as G6 by Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 06:05, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not something that should be a template. Gonnym (talk) 09:03, 3 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).
Template:Latest preview software release/Apache Tomcat
- 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 11:47, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unused software release version templates. If any gets reused during this TfD, remove it from list. Gonnym (talk) 08:57, 3 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 July 10. ✗plicit 11:49, 10 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 July 11. Izno (talk) 02:44, 11 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).
Template:Article for protection
- 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 11:50, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to have been imported from somewhere else as this is full of red links and created by a user with 10 edits, all of which were reverted. Gonnym (talk) 08:46, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Nonsense templates, probably created out of simple lack of knowledge about WP:RM and WP:RFPP. I had already redirected Template:Article for move to Template:Title notice, which is the closest equivalent we do currently use, and as its template description page contains an explanation of the process. This was reverted to start this TfD here, so obviously I'm in favor of deletion. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:30, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete under criterion WP:G3 as
blatant and obvious misinformation
. The content of these templates is entirely fake, there is no "Article for protection" or "Article for move" processes. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 17:13, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Misleading as that is not how the processes work. they look like the AFD template with 'deletion' changed to the other words and 'afd' modified to reflect the change. 82.132.186.65 (talk) 21:39, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The user has now been blocked. Gonnym (talk) 07:25, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete under criterion G3 and G5 AKK700 04:17, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, don't replace with a redirect Obviously these need deleting, but I think the redirect was incorrect – ((title notice)) should only be applied by bot, and as such, it isn't useful to have synonyms for it because the bot wouldn't be using them. --ais523 23:30, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- delete per nomination, and ais523. —usernamekiran (talk) 06:56, 9 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).