The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 G7 by Ponyo (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 00:04, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:CPL Draft Number Two Picks (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Canadian_Premier_League_first_round_draft_picks_navigational_boxes. Given MLS doesn't have a corresponding template for 2nd overall picks, it doesn't make sense for the CPL to have one, when MLS Draft is a more notable but comparable event. RedPatch (talk) 14:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, not clear what notability a "second pick of the draft" has such that it merits a navbox. Jay eyem (talk) 15:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, clear case of WP:NENAN (not everything needs a navbox). You could make a good argument that the CPL draft is not even notable enough to merit a "first picks" template. BLAIXX 14:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 15:21, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - totally non notable. GiantSnowman 15:22, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note The creator tagged the template for WP:CSD#G7, and given the unanimity for deletion here, I've deleted it per their request.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 22:00, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Figure skating WS and SB (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The template was deprecated stating: remove the full lists of ISU world standings and seasons bests from ((Infobox figure skater)) and only add the highest career world standing, using the new parameter |highest_WS= with the period in parentheses. Gonnym (talk) 11:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gonnym: Yes, you have my full support to delete the template. It shall no longer be used on skaters' biography pages, and there is no other use for it. Henni147 (talk) 13:16, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 22:01, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Southern Min (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

As of now, it's redundant due to the existence of Template:Min Chinese and how few pages specifically related to varieties of Southern Min exist. Arctic Circle System (talk) 06:46, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Remsense聊 17:01, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• This template certainly does seem redundant to ((Min Chinese)), but it's still transcluded into 40 articles by my sleepy count: 25 directly and 15 via its redirect, ((Southern Min Languages)) (which should be moved to sentence case per WP:AT, alas).
  ((Min Chinese)) is enormous. Are these forty articles (like, for example, Haklau Min, ~850 bytes readable prose) better served by the full template (4.2kb) than by the current one (2.2kb)? And are they better served by a navbox featuring File:Min Languages.svg (seven colour coded Min dialects; Southern Min all the same colour) than File:Banlamgu.svg (five colour coded Southern Min varietals)? Most individual topolect articles do seem to have File:Banlamgu.svg already in their main infobox.
  It's probably technically possible to transclude ((Southern Min)) within ((Min Chinese)), but I'm genuinely uncertain if this is better or not better for the affected articles. I will say that ((Min Chinese)), for most use cases where it would replace ((Southern Min)) (individual topolects), feels on its own pretty redundant to Template:Chinese language, already present in those articles.
  I think I've convinced myself that the articles currently transcluding ((Southern Min)) or ((Southern Min Languages)) might actually be better off with ((Min Chinese)), because it gives them a new contextual dialect map not present in the infobox, and may allow for the removal of the hefty ((Chinese language)), although that step should certainly be discussed at the affected pages. Having said that, I don't think deletion is necessarily the best route here. I think other people might reasonably reach a conclusion opposite to the one I've drawn, and would like to go through the technical challenge of embedding ((Southern Min)) into ((Min Chinese)). So I think it should be easier to undo than a deletion, and the history should remain visible to non-admins.
  So I think the best course of action is Redirect to Template:Min Chinese, and retarget Template:Southern Min Languages to ((Min Chinese)) to fix the double redirect. Template:Minnan languages, which also redirects to ((Southern Min)), has no transclusions. Folly Mox (talk) 12:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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 03:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Pie chart of the religion in Mexico (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single-use template in Mexico. Subst and delete. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:08, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Subst per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. 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) 22:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Known issue (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I just saw this today. From the documentation of this template: "This template is used to say that there is a known issue with an article." Huh? What make san issue "known"? And to whom? And what is the worth, or even relevance, in knowing that the issue is known? Is it a redeeming quality? And if so, from what does it redeem. In short, completely unclear why we need this! Used on only 55 pages. Debresser (talk) 00:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I have updated this page's documentation. It appears to be useful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I found it in an article. So at least it should be removed from articles. I have temporarily removed the code you added, and after removing the template from articles will restore it. As a talkpage template, and as part of the larger set of templates that is not in the documentation, I agree that we can keep this. Since this is in use on only two talkpages, and in view of the questions I asked above, making the point that saying that an issue is "known" is not of any value, I think we should still delete this. Debresser (talk) 02:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Pointless template - just type "known issue" directly on the tiny number of legitimate uses. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:33, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Pppery above. If this is intended to track something, it's not helping. Two transclusions in talkspace, which would be better served by a clearer description of the issue known. Doesn't output a fahncy image like many discussion templates, just the text "Known issue" in a lil box. Folly Mox (talk) 12:27, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.