Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

"WP:TFD" redirects here. For templates nominated today, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2026 October 3. For nominating TimedText pages or talk pages, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. For a list of templates used for discussion, see Wikipedia:List of discussion templates.

XFD backlog

V	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Total
CfD	24	15	72	0	111
TfD	0	0	45	0	45
MfD	0	0	0	0	0
FfD	0	27	23	0	50
RfD	0	0	74	0	74
AfD	0	0	22	0	22

Templates for discussion (TfD) is where Wikipedians discuss whether a template or Lua module should be deleted or merged. Nominated templates are normally discussed for at least seven days, after which a decision may be reached based on community consensus.

If you want to nominate a template or module for deletion or merging, follow the instructions below. The discussion could result in an outcome other than the one you nominate it for (e.g., a merge nomination can result in deletion).

How to use this page

Reasons for nominating a template

1. The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance.
2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
3. The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used.
4. The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and it can't be fixed through normal editing.

Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, WikiProject Templates may be able to help. Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for discussion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.

What not to nominate here

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module namespace should be nominated on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

• Stub templates – Stub templates and categories should be nominated at Categories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories, unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
• Userboxes – Userboxes should be nominated at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
• Template redirects – Nominate all redirects at Redirects for discussion.
• Moving and renaming a template – Use Requested moves.
• Speedy deletion candidates – If the template clearly satisfies a criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{Db-author}}. See also WP:T5.
• Policy or guideline templates – Templates that are associated with particular Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as the speedy deletion templates, cannot be nominated at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant policy or guideline.

Nominate a template

You are not logged in, so you are not autoconfirmed. Unless you log in, you cannot nominate an template on your own.Your account is autoconfirmed. This means you can use Twinkle to easily nominate templates!is not autoconfirmed. You can nominate templates, but you cannot use Twinkle to do it easily.

Follow the instructions in this section to nominate a template for deletion or for merging into another template. Do not include the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps. If you wish to nominate multiple related templates at once, nominate the first template using one of the methods below, preferably the § Twinkle method, and then bundle the additional templates into the existing nomination.

You will need to write a short nomination statement, explaining why you think the template should be deleted or merged. If a nomination does not recommend any course of action, such as merge or redirect, it is implied that the nominator recommends deletion. For desired outcomes other than deletion, the statement typically starts with '''Propose merging''' [[Template:...]] into [[Template:...]].

Only registered users can nominate templates for deletion or merging. If the box on the left says your account is autoconfirmed, it is highly recommended that you use the Twinkle tool to nominate templates. Otherwise, you can become autoconfirmed by creating an account and making at least 10 edits and waiting 4 days since your first edit.

Methods

Twinkle

How to nominate a template at TfD

After enabling Twinkle, navigate to the template you want to nominate

Simply fill out the form and click "Submit"!

The easiest way to nominate templates for deletion or merging is using the Twinkle tool. To install and use the tool, follow these steps:

1. Open your Gadgets preferences, find and enable "Twinkle", then click Save
2. Go back to the template, click "TW" in the top right, and choose "XFD"
3. Select your desired outcome from the list (delete or merge) and write a short nomination statement
4. If you want to nominate more than one template, follow these additional steps

Manual method

If you are autoconfirmed, you should use the § Twinkle method to nominate templates at TfD. You can use the manual method in case you're registered but not yet autoconfirmed. However, using Twinkle is still recommended in most cases. All of the steps below can be performed automatically by the script in a few seconds.

Step	Instructions
Step 1 Tag the template	Paste one of the following notices to the top of the template page: For deletion: {{subst:Tfd}} For deletion of a sidebar or infobox template: {{subst:Tfd|type=sidebar}} For deletion of an inline template: {{subst:Tfd|type=inline}} and don't add a newline after the notice. For merging: {{subst:Tfm|name of other template}} For merging an inline template: {{subst:Tfm|type=inline|name of other template to be merged}} and don't add a newline after the notice. To delete a module or a different type of template, see Template:Template for discussion § Display on articles Note: If the template is protected, request that the TfD notice be added on the template's talk page using the {{editprotected}} template, to catch the attention of administrators or template editors. If the template is designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template. Example: <noinclude>{{subst:Tfd}}</noinclude> Use an edit summary like Nominated for discussion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]] Before saving your edit, preview the page to ensure the TfD notice is displayed properly. Related categories If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, paste {{Catfd|name of the template}} to the top of any categories that could be deleted as a result of the TfD, replacing template name with the name of the first nominated template. (If you instead nominated multiple templates, use {{Catfd|header=name of the first template}}.) TemplateStyles pages If you are nominating TemplateStyles pages, these templates won't work. Instead, paste this CSS comment to the top of the page: /* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2026_October_3#Template:template_name.css */
Step 2 List the template	Edit today's TfD log and paste the following text to the top of the list: For deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|name of the template|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}} For merging: {{subst:Tfm2|name of the template|name of the other template|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}} If the template has had previous TfDs, you can optionally add {{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without square brackets|result of previous TfD}} in the |text= field immediately before your rationale (or alternatively at the very end, after the last }}). Use an edit summary such as Adding deletion/merging nomination of [[Template:template name]]. Related categories If this template deletion proposal involves a category populated solely by templates, paste this code in the |text= field of the {{Tfd2}} template, before your rationale: {{subst:Catfd2|name of the category}}

Nominate multiple templates

If nominating similar templates for deletion or merging, it is best to make this a group nomination so that they can be considered collectively. This avoids excessive repetition. However, if a template in the group has a significantly better chance of standing on its own merits, it should not be bundled—nominate it separately. For the sake of clarity, nominations should only be bundled near the start of the process, ideally before any substantive discussion, but may be acceptable following a couple other editors' comments.

Nominate the first template, preferably using Twinkle

To do it manually instead, follow  Step 1  above. Tag every template with {{subst:Tfd|heading=name of the first template}} or {{subst:Tfm|name of the other template|heading=name of the first template}} instead of the versions given in  Step 1 , but still not changing the PAGENAME code.

List the template

To do it manually, follow  Step 2  above, paste the following code instead. You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters |).

• Multiple templates for deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|name of the first template|name of the second template|name of the third template|title=name of the first template|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}
• Multiple templates for merging: {{subst:Tfm2|name of the first template|name of the second template|with=main template (optional)|title=name of the first template|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

If there is a template you want the other templates to be merged into, you can optionally specify it using |with= as shown in the example above.

After nominating, notify interested parties

While listing a template at TfD is sufficient, nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant template policies or guidelines, and please provide a link to the TfD discussion page itself.

Deletion sorting lists

After nominating a template, you can optionally inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "Deletion sorting lists", such as the ones for actors, music, academics, or specific countries. Since many people watch these sorting pages for subject areas that particularly interest them, adding your recent TfD nomination to one of these pages helps attract people familiar with a particular topic area. If you do it, insert {{subst:delsort|topic|~~~~}} as a new comment at the bottom of the TfD discussion, to let others know.

Notify related WikiProjects

WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD.

Tagging the nominated article's talk page with a relevant WikiProject's banner will result in the article being listed in that project's Article Alerts automatically if they subscribe to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notify substantial contributors to the template

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the templates that you are nominating. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the template, use the Page History tool, or use Wikipedia Page History Statistics. Respect neutrality when making invitations to participate in the discussion; selectively notifying editors is not allowed. To notify them, you can ping them in a comment on the TfD discussion, such as {{ping|User1|User2|User3|...}} Notifying contributors to the templates. ~~~~. Alternatively, you can send them a talk page message using {{subst:Tfd notice|Name of the template}} (if you nominated it for deletion) or {{subst:Tfm notice|Name of the template}} (if you nominated it for merging).

At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator.

Discussion

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the deletion policy and explain your reasoning. People will sometimes recommend subst, subst and delete, or similar. This means they think the template text should be "hard-coded" into the articles that are currently using it. Depending on the content, the template itself may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.

Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussion

Administrators should read the closing instructions before closing a nomination. Note that XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

October 2

Template:Fish market

• Template:Fish market (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused cleanup template created in the last few months, and not really sure where it would actually be of use. It was only used on one page, Sim racing wheel, presumably because it contained a long comparison list, which I then broke out into a separate page Comparison of sim racing peripherals. Even then, I'm not sure that the claims of the template applied there: the list does not particularly "resemble a marketplace" as stated. It reads mostly like a template created for a one-off content dispute. ~ oklopfer (💬︎) 18:17, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:The Humanx Commonwealth

• Template:The Humanx Commonwealth (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

after AfDs of fancruft, the template became meaningless. --Altenmann >talk 15:41, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

October 1

Template:Gwen Stacy

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 G5 by Ponyo (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 20:13, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Gwen Stacy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Yet another WP:INDISCRIMINATE collection of related works that are marginally related to the character, but are not exclusively about the character itself. Why should this exist alongside Template:Gwenpool (another navbox I brought to TfD)? That poses too much overlap that categories could adequately cover for more suitable organizational purposes. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 16:40, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Template creator saying Keep. Those templates have one link in common. And Gwenpool is not Gwen Stacy. Grelding (talk) 18:16, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Gwenpool is an alternate version of Gwen Stacy, so yes, they are intrinsically connected. In what way would another template, such as {{Spider-Man characters}}, {{Spider-Man publications}}, or {{Spider-Man in popular media}} not be sufficient for the navigational purposes? This is the equivalent of giving Lois Lane her own template because she is a supporting character of Superman. Many of these entries are already better suited for and covered by other navboxes. This is just a laundry list of randomly selected related links. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 19:24, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Gwenpool is absolutely not an alternate version of Gwen Stacy, so no, they are as connected as Jessica Jones is to Jessica Drew. Drew is why Jones is called Jessica, and Stacy is why Poole is called Gwen, but they are different people with the same first name, just like how Peter Parker and Peter Quill are also different people with the same first name in the lore, and not alternate-universe versions of the same character. Claiming Gwen Poole is Gwen Stacy makes it seem like you don't know anything about either character, and should not be arguing about templates for either character. Like arguing Template:Spider-Woman should be deleted because Template:Spider-Man also exists, or that Template:Ultimate Universe should be deleted because Template:Ultimate Marvel exists. This list lists the two series Gwen Stacy has been the protagonist of, the supporting charactes of those series, the two articles about film adaptations of the characters, and the events and storylines that she has been a main character in. Grelding (talk) 00:07, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

• Checkuser note: Speedy deleted per WP:CSD#G5.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:48, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

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.

Template:GHS hazard pictograms

• Template:GHS hazard pictograms (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS pictogram (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS exploding bomb (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS flame (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS flame over circle (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS gas cylinder (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS corrosion (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS skull and crossbones (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS exclamation mark (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS health hazard (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:GHS environment (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:GHS hazard pictograms with Template:GHS pictogram.
Template:GHS hazard pictograms is just a wrapper for Template:GHS pictogram to allow it to accept multiple values. I'd like to merge them into one template, possibly using a lua module.

Each of the other templates listed duplicate the function this merged template would have, and this template is more convenient than the others. For example, typing {{GHS|01|03|05}} does the same thing as {{GHS01}}{{GHS03}}{{GHS05}}. Just might be nice if we could merge these 11 templates into one. (If consensus is found I can merge these myself.) FlammablePizza (talk / contrib) 14:12, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

• Merge the individual templates to {{GHS pictogram}}. I don't think it needs a Lua module; it's just a simple switch statement. Although I see that {{GHS hazard pictograms}}, which uses the redirect {{GHS}}, has the ability to show multiple icons, which seems useful. Maybe that does need a Lua module; I haven't thought that part through. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:43, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Merge would be my preferred outcome, but retaining the ability to show multiple icons (as compactly as possible) is pretty crucial for chemboxes. They're only separate in order to have {{for loop}} behave properly, and I wasn't sure how to do this without multiple templates. I created {{GHS pictogram}} as a way of unifying the separate GHS templates (e.g. {{GHS01}}), and if we can merge those in a way that doesn't break older chemboxes that would be great. Fishsicles (talk) 01:47, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

I’ve considered this for quite a bit, and the best solution I have come up with is to:

1. Merge GHS pictogram and GHS hazard pictrograms using a lua module. If you take a look at simple:Template:GHS pictogram, you can kind of get an idea of the implementation. It keeps all of the features your current template has.

2. Have a bot run replace all calls to the old templates. There isn’t really a clean way to do this with redirects or something else, and this bot task should be fairly simple.

3. Speedy delete the old, now unused templates, per this TfD (assuming it is closed as merge of course). FlammablePizza (talk / contrib) 03:06, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:Ivorian senatorial elections

• Template:Ivorian senatorial elections (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only links two articles, can be dealt with through normal linking. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 12:43, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:Pakistan Test cricket records by opponent

• Template:Pakistan Test cricket records by opponent (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Pakistan ODI cricket records by opponent (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Pakistan T20I cricket records by opponent (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unnecessary templates to display article content, previously deleted Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 23#Template:Pakistan Test cricket records by opponent / Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 February 23#Template:Ireland ODI cricket records by opponent. Section transclusion is the standard way to do this. Spike 'em (talk) 11:00, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

September 30

Template:The Cure songs

• Template:The Cure songs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Recently split from and redundant to {{The Cure}} navbox, which destroys the chronology of the singles. We are better served with a single navbox. --woodensuperman 20:57, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Please see prior consensus for multiple navboxes of this type: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 August 6#Template:Hilary Duff songs; Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 June 19#Template:Meghan Trainor songs; Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 July 22#Template:Nina Sky songs; Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 April 21#Template:Sum 41 singles, Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 November 24#Template:Lionel Richie singles, Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_June_8#Template:The_Cure_singles, Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_August_18#Template:Jamiroquai_singles, Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_September_11#Template:A_Day_to_Remember_singles, Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2014_July_27#Template:Pink_Floyd_singles, Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2009 November 5#Template:R.E.M. singles, Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 December 16#Template:Avicii songs, the list goes on

... --woodensuperman 21:12, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

And I've already noted on the talk page, the "prior consensuses" you speak of, for the most part, don't apply to this specific situation because they are either (1) for a musician with only a handful of songs with articles at the time, or (2) because of a "redundancy" issue between the main and subsidiary infobox which I already resolved by removing the songs from the main infobox. While past consensus is indeed useful for determining present consensus, it's not a free pass if the circumstances differ significantly. Leafy46 (talk) 21:20, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

As the creator of this template (and as discussed on the talk page), I fail to see how this current form "destroys the chronology of the singles". I understand the concern wrt its original version when the songs were split up by album, but this version using decades, if literally nothing else, maintains the chronology of the singles.

I also disagree that this is redundant to Template:The Cure. I've deleted the songs from that navbox, so there is no overlap between the two templates content-wise. Additionally, WP:NAVBOX notes that "templates with a large number of links are not forbidden, but can appear overly busy and be hard to read and use" -- given that this band has almost 50 songs with Wikipedia articles, I thought that splitting it off into a different template would improve navigation in line with the numerous other examples over at Category:Songs navigational boxes and its subcategories. This is all in an effort to make the templates easier to read/use, and I don't believe that readers would be any better served via a block of links on the main navbox. Leafy46 (talk) 21:15, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

You realise that Killing an Arab was their first single, right? --woodensuperman 21:16, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

I hastily threw together a new template based on our discussion because I wanted it to exist so you could bring the discussion here. If there's a mistake, it can be fixed. Demanding the entire template be deleted based off of that is, frankly, an overreaction. Leafy46 (talk) 21:22, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Fixed. Leafy46 (talk) 21:26, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Still, this is not a big navbox. The singles can quite happily sit in the main navbox, a split is unnecessary. Readers are better served when the links are all in the same place as they have for a long time. This is actually a candidate for speedy deletion per Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_June_8#Template:The_Cure_singles. --woodensuperman 21:30, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Uh... hello? We're at TfD already, why are you nominating this template for speedy deletion? This reeks of desperation to avoid having a discussion at any cost, especially given that you also refused to bring this article to TfD despite me asking you to until another user got involved.

Anyways, per WP:G4 "[This] excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, and pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies." The reason for deletion back then was that info was duplicated between the main and subsidiary infobox. For the umpteenth time, I already resolved the problem by removing the songs from the main navbox. So can we please have a reasonable discussion, instead of you ignoring my points and trying to force your viewpoint? Leafy46 (talk) 21:50, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

So you broke a completely good navbox against prior consensus that two navboxes weren't needed? --woodensuperman 22:14, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support, the full complete navbox in one place seems the way to go, it's not very long and includes the relevant links. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:11, 30 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete. The original navbox, with the songs, is not so large that it needs to be split. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:33, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:Far (band)

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 speedy delete. Tagged with G7 by creator on talk page, which I later realized might have been done to avoid transcluding the template. ASUKITE 01:05, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Far (band) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only two albums with articles, can be navigated through normal linking, WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 14:28, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment: The talk page has been tagged with G7 by its creator. ~ lily ^{my tree} ~ 03:21, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

@Jax 0667 I just noticed the talk pages were tagged, was your intent to allow speedy deletion of this and the below template page? ASUKITE 17:02, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

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.

Template:The Revolution Smile

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 speedy delete. Tagged with G7 by creator on talk page, which I later realized might have been done to avoid transcluding the template. ASUKITE 01:05, 3 October 2026 (UTC)

• Template:The Revolution Smile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only one album with an article, can be navigated through normal linking, WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 14:27, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment: The talk page has been tagged with G7 by its creator. ~ lily ^{my tree} ~ 03:21, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

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.

September 29

Module:Multiformat

• Module:Multiformat (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Module:For nowiki (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Module:Multiformat with Module:For nowiki.
I started this module a while back because the now-deleted Module:Params was cumbersome to use and I could not figure out how to work it. But now that it is clear that Module:For nowiki does a better job and is easier to use, I think this module can be merged or deleted (saying as the original creator). There is some functionality that can be added to the latter module, specifically to specify argument prefixes (so that calls involving arguments from the parent template of the format "arg[num]" work properly), but otherwise I don't know if there is much I am adding, and this module has not faced significant use over the past few months, the only other use being Template:Templates notice/inner (which I added) as far as I am aware. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 21:11, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

For argument prefixes, see Module:ArgRest instead. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:49, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes, or Module:For params, I guess. Depending on how the "arg[num]" patterns need to work. — Chrisahn (talk) 19:51, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:Babel0

• Template:Babel0 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No documentation or incoming links to explain what this was supposed to be. Probably redundant to one of the many customizable Babel templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:41, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

delete, seems redundant to {{userbox-level|level=0}} Frietjes (talk) 19:53, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:U35

• Template:U35 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox for a (currently) non-notable manga artist who is barely mentioned (if at all) on the linked pages. Navbox has existed for a couple of months now but there doesn't appear to be any move towards creating the page (nor is there a mention at U35 itself). Primefac (talk) 14:56, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, / RemoveRedSky ^[talk] 14:41, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:IUCN-LC

• Template:IUCN-LC (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:IUCN-NT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:IUCN-VU (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:IUCN-EN (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:IUCN-CR (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:IUCN-EX (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:IUCN-DD (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I have made a new template, {{IUCN cell}}, which combines all of these into one template, and matches {{IUCN status}}. If it's ok, I'd like to replace instances of these templates with my new one, and delete/redirect these. Thanks! Let Me Edit It (talk) 14:05, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support: Good work, this will match proper colors used by IUCN. However, please ensure that you are willing to replace the old templates with the new ones as each of these is currently transcluded onto tens of pages. That will be a bit of task. •Shawnqual• • 💭 19:33, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:Taxonomy/Mosasauroid

• Template:Taxonomy/Mosasauroid (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not an oofamily. This name has never been used in the literature for any ootaxon. Ashorocetus (talk | contribs) 06:40, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Glendive TV

• Template:Glendive TV (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No more Glendive market per https://www.nielsen.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/09/redbook_fa26.pdf (pages 22-26) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:38, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete A questionable candidate for a navbox to begin with all those years ago, given that the market only had one television station this whole time. Only four pages link into it, and only one of them, KXGN-TV, is linked out of it in its body. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 17:57, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Filipino

• Template:Infobox Filipino (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or incoming links from discussions explaining why it was created. An abandoned experiment? – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:36, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

It was abandoned. I tired everything to include Baybayin but it failed. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 03:19, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Eleventh National Council of the Chinese People's Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries

• Template:Eleventh National Council of the Chinese People's Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox with no transclusions and no blue links in the body. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:33, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:3rd Army Group (France) – Structure by Corps (May 1940)

• Template:3rd Army Group (France) – Structure by Corps (May 1940) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox with no transclusions. Not enough links to be useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:31, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:1st Army Corps (France) – Order of Battle (May 1940)

• Template:1st Army Corps (France) – Order of Battle (May 1940) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox with no transclusions. Not enough links to be useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:31, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Montenegrin monarchs

• Template:Montenegrin monarchs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Monarchs of Montenegro (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Montenegrin monarchs with Template:Monarchs of Montenegro.
Merge: I can't see what the difference is; seems like exact same topic. P 1 9 9  ✉ 01:39, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• Merge to {{Monarchs of Montenegro}}, ensuring that all relevant entries from List of monarchs of Montenegro are included. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:39, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

September 27

Template:Cr-NEP

• Template:Cr-NEP (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I'm not quite sure what is the point of this template other than violating WP:NFCC and toying around with the manual of style (WP:MOSICON). Typing the link manually is better than needing a template that is only transcluded in 24 pages. — SimpleObjects-9ei 🍂/🌰/🤗 (see talk) 04:59, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment. I am not sure what is Violeted by this template. For editor like us who have to create new article it is very useful and make our work fast. Tournament having 40/50 matches it is very hard to write every team name where this template generate easily name to crossponding team name with code this type of template help us and also make article tidy. ** Godknowme1 ** :: talk  08:34, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep – WP:MOSICON permits shortcut templates in match listings, and replacing any removed non-free files with a standard freely licensed flag or keeping text only easily resolves the WP:NFCC concern without needing deletion. Ravana ^TALK 09:34, 27 September 2026 (UTC)
• delete, with the icons removed this is mostly pointless. Frietjes (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  Can you explain what icon are you talking about? These templates are used to generate team name not any icon.  ** Godknowme1 ** :: talk  01:35, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

  Godknowme1, if you look at the template history, you will see where the icons were removed. Frietjes (talk) 15:19, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep – I don’t see any violations and there is no need to delete this template as template aims to make editors life easier not harder this kind of template especially for cricket makes easier to create articles which save so many time and, nominating a template just because some random user added WP:NFCC isn’t that normal can’t we remove that edit? This was already used in many articles and just reverting in those articles may change past but this template was created to use in every year tournament. Let me give you an example writing Bagmati Province cricket team or cr-NEP|bp which is faster and efficient? Yes if this for 1/2 matches writing whole name will be ok but tournaments having 40/50 even more matches; having this kind of template make editors life easier. ** Godknowme1 ** :: talk  02:14, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

September 26

Template:Sidebar/Victorian political leader

• Template:Sidebar/Victorian political leader (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions. I don't see any discussions that led to the creation of this template. It appears that it may have been used for a while and then discontinued. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:08, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• delete, not needed. Frietjes (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Sport deaths in North America (category)

• Template:Sport deaths in North America (category) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Most of the "categories" in this template are redlinks. Of the ones that are not, only two have more than three articles - and one of those two isn't even the category itself, but a soft redirect. Two of the remaining categories have exactly three articles each, while the remaining three have exactly one each. Unless someone can find a way to make more categories for this without them getting C1-deleted, I don't think this template serves any more purpose. JHD0919 (talk) 16:49, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• Y Weak support: per nom.

🐴🌀^{[citation needed]} 07:41, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Comma-separated list

• Template:Comma-separated list (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Comma-separated entries (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Enum (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose turning {{Comma-separated entries}} and {{Comma-separated list}} into wrappers of {{Enum}}.
These three templates basically do the same exact thing: make a list separated by a comma. This causes an unnecessary maintenance burden. Since {{Enum}} is the oldest and most mature of the bunch and is the only template that supports every feature (disabling/enabling "and", custom separator, serial and non-serial comma, etc), I propose merging {{Comma-separated entries}} and {{Comma-separated list}} into {{Enum}} and turning them into a fully-functioning wrapper of {{Enum}}, so we don't have to maintain three separate templates. FaviFake (talk) 11:30, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: It would be helpful for the nominator to provide a demonstration page showing that all of the features in the "Comma" templates can be performed by Enum. Please be sure to include inline and block examples, since Module:Separated entries appears to be an inline template while Module:Comma-separated list appears to be a block template. [Edited to add: I would have preferred a talk-page discussion to think through this merge proposal before adding TfM templates that caused tens of thousands of Linter errors and is causing messages to be displayed on tens of thousands of pages. TfM/TfD messages that are this widespread tend to cause a lot of unnecessary and unhelpful traffic on TfD pages by people saying "Don't merge, this is causing too much disruption."] – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:22, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

I don't see why {{Comma separated entries}} needs to be merged when it's already effectively merged with all the other templates using {{#invoke:Separated entries}}. Axolitl (talk | contribs) 15:13, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

Also, {{Cslist}} as actually very different than the other two, as it actually uses HTML <li> tags. Axolitl (talk | contribs) 15:16, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

OT: Since this discussion opened, every Template:Blockquote in the namespace seems to show a technical note "‹See TfM›" linking to this discussion (which is how I got here). I'm not sure I understand all technical details - is this discussion about wheither the syntax itself might be overhauled, or does it only affect its "rendering machines" (so-to-say)? Tartigradesinspace (talk) 15:53, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: Every {{infobox website}} with parameter headquarter is also affected by this. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 16:47, 26 September 2026 (UTC)
• Comment. Suggest possibly discussing this at the Village Pump or some such to ensure visibility and skipping the notification template? This TFD is extremely visible and will have massive splash effects for a week if left here, so by IAR, maybe better to pick some other way of discussion. SnowFire (talk) 17:11, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  Why would we need to discuss routine maintenance at the Village Pump? If the automatic TfD notice is showing up in too many places it can just be removed. FaviFake (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  As I explained above, unless there is a clear plan and a demonstration of how the merge would work, the TFD will cause unnecessary disruption for readers and editors and attract a lot of less-than-useful feedback, making the closer's job more difficult and making a "no consensus" outcome more likely. We saw this exact thing happen last week with the poorly-thought-out column template nominations. It benefits everyone, including the nominator, to have a discussion and make a plan before going through the formal TFD/TFM process. I suggest withdrawing this nomination and starting a discussion on one of the templates' talk pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:13, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  the TFD will cause unnecessary disruption for readers and editors and attract a lot of less-than-useful feedback
  No it wouldn't, unless we keep the <See TfM> notices on the articles. I'm not knowledgeable enough to create a fully-fledged proposal, we just need to get consensus that we don't need three different templates to do the same thing, and then the folks at the holding cell will do the rest and figure out how to implement it. FaviFake (talk) 23:49, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  The TfD completely broke {{db-multiple}} before the notice on {{enum}} was noincluded, as the second speedy deletion criterion was replaced with "See TfM". SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 00:20, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

  Yes, that's why I said "No it wouldn't [cause unnecessary disruption], unless we keep the <See TfM> notices". FaviFake (talk) 17:25, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

  The tags have been hidden because they caused unnecessary disruption. Q.E.D. As for "the folks at the holding cell" figuring it out, we can't do magic at the holding cell. Merging an inline template with a block template may not be possible. The burden is on you to demonstrate that this merge is possible. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  The tags have been hidden because they caused unnecessary disruption.
  ... Am I being unclear? You suggested closing this discussion partly because the notice disrupted other templates. Then the notice was removed, and I said that rationale for closing this TfD is now invalid, because the notices have now been removed...

  The burden is on you to demonstrate that this merge is possible.
  Where is that written? Most TfD merge proposals I've seen are vague. FaviFake (talk) 19:31, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  Your implicit TFD nomination criterion is number 2, The template is redundant to a better-designed template. I'm asking you to demonstrate that this is the case. Multiple editors have stated objections to or questions about this merge, citing the block versus inline nature of the nominated templates. If you are correct in your statement that These three templates basically do the same exact thing, demonstrating that should not be difficult. If you prefer to argue with me instead of showing that your merge rationale is valid, that is your choice. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:00, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

  Your implicit TFD nomination criterion is number 2
  I asked for where it says that "The burden is on [the nom] to demonstrate that this merge is possible". I've never heard such a rule before.

  demonstrating that should not be difficult
  Well, I do find it difficult, which is why I didn't want to be specific in my nomination. FaviFake (talk) 22:30, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: This TfD has broken {{db-multiple}} even with the tiny font size for the notification. I can demonstrate if required. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 18:21, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  Yep. It did. International Fujita scale (talk) 19:57, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  It was fixed by Jonesey95 on the Enum template. International Fujita scale (talk) 20:31, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support Seems to be a way so that you can edit all template content outputs in transclusions at once. Reduces hassle. International Fujita scale (talk) 20:06, 26 September 2026 (UTC)
• Redirect {{comma-separated entries}} and {{enum}} to {{comma-separated list}}. CSL can return A, B, and C or A, B, C, etc., so it would be best to have the other two be its aliases. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 00:11, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Update: {{Comma-separated entries}} has the most transclusions by far, so if a merge is to be performed, CSE may be the best of the three templates to merge to if we want to minimize the work that may need to be done to correct transclusions of the other two templates. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 14:47, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose merging inline and block templates without a demonstration that all of the current features of each template can be preserved. The nominator needs to do their due diligence, and they have so far declined to do so. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment: A merge via redirect may be possible:

Wikitext	Desired output	Result by template
		{{comma-separated list}} Used in 3,507 articles	{{comma-separated entries}} Used in 306,443 articles	{{enum}} Used in 14,304 articles
|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie}}	Alpha, Bravo and Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie	Alpha, Bravo and Charlie
|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|oxford=yes}}		Alpha, Bravo, and Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie	Alpha, Bravo and Charlie
|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|conjunction=, and{{nbsp}}}}		Alpha Bravo Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, and Charlie	Alpha, Bravo and Charlie
|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|etc.}}	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie and etc.
|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|and=,{{nbsp}}|after=, etc.}}		Alpha, Bravo, Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.
|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|and=,{{nbsp}}|etc.}}		Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.
|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|conjunction=, or{{nbsp}}}}	Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie	Alpha, Bravo and Charlie
|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|and=, or{{nbsp}}}}		Alpha, Bravo, Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, Charlie	Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie

  Results don't sufficiently match desired text

  Results match despite the use of template-invalid parameters

If these templates are merged, the final template would have to be coded in such a way that it would minimize the number of articles that would need to be edited to ensure that tranclusions of any of these templates would still return text that says what it's supposed to say. CSE's conjunction parameter and enum's and parameter would have to become eachother's alias.

While making this, I discovered that substing {{comma-separated list}} causes its text to disappear. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 10:53, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for compiling the above table. Unfortunately, it doesn't show the difference between inline and block usage, and the substing makes it a lot of work to go back to update the demonstration. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:27, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

I don't like how—when using the conjunction parameter on {{comma-separated entries}} or the and parameter on {{enum}} to put or between Bravo and Charlie—I have to sandwich the word between non-breaking spaces to avoid getting this:

Alpha, BravoorCharlie. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 15:00, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep all three, otherwise Merge {{comma-separated list}} and {{enum}} into {{comma-separated entries}} and make enum's and parameter an alias of the conjunction parameter, based on the following information:

• {{comma-separated list}} and {{comma-separated entries}} are transcluded in 309,734 articles, 216 of which use both. If these are merged into {{enum}}:
  • Transclusions intended to produce Alpha, Bravo and Charlie would continue to do so despite using parameters from other templates.
  • Transclusions intended to produce Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc. would have to have |and=,  added so they don't read Alpha, Bravo, Charlie and etc..
  • Transclusions intended to produce Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie would instead return Alpha, Bravo and Charlie unless conjunction is an alias of the and parameter.
• {{comma-separated list}} and {{enum}} are transcluded in 17,809 articles, 2 of which use both. If these are merged into {{comma-separated entries}}:
  • Transclusions intended to produce Alpha, Bravo and Charlie but erroneously return Alpha, Bravo, Charlie can be corrected by adding |conjunction=, and .
  • Transclusions intended to produce Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc. but erroneously return Alpha, Bravo, Charlie can be corrected by removing after=, .
  • Transclusions intended to produce Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie would instead return Alpha, Bravo, Charlie unless and is an alias of the conjunction parameter.
• {{comma-separated entries}} and {{enum}} are transcluded in 320,167 articles, 580 of which use both. If these are merged into {{comma-separated list}}:
  • Transclusions intended to produce Alpha, Bravo and Charlie would have to have |oxford=yes added so they don't read Alpha, Bravo, Charlie.
  • Transclusions intended to produce Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc. but erroneously return Alpha, Bravo, Charlie can be corrected by removing after=, .
  • Transclusions intended to produce Alpha, Bravo or Charlie wouldn't be correctable unless CSL is given a parameter that is functionally equivalent to CSE's conjunction or enum's and parameter.

Accounting for the effects of merging enum with CSE

Scenario	Equivalent wikitext	Result
{{enum}} remains a separate template
	{{enum|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie}}	Y Alpha, Bravo and Charlie
	{{enum|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|and=,{{nbsp}}|after=, etc.}}	Y Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.
	{{enum|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|and=, or{{nbsp}}}}	Y Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie
{{enum}} redirects to {{comma-separated entries}}
	{{comma-separated entries|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie}}	N Alpha, Bravo, Charlie
	{{comma-separated entries|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|and=,{{nbsp}}|after=, etc.}}	N Alpha, Bravo, Charlie
	{{comma-separated entries|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|and=, or{{nbsp}}}}	N Alpha, Bravo, Charlie
and becomes an alias of CSE's conjunction parameter
	No difference, as that parameter isn't used here.	N Alpha, Bravo, Charlie
	{{comma-separated entries|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|conjunction=,{{nbsp}}|after=, etc.}}	N Alpha, Bravo, Charlie
	{{comma-separated entries|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|conjunction=, or{{nbsp}}}}	Y Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie
after=,  is removed from the transclusion
	No difference, as that parameter isn't used here.	N Alpha, Bravo, Charlie
	{{comma-separated entries|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|conjunction=,{{nbsp}}|etc.}}	Y Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.
	No difference, as that parameter isn't used here.	Y Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie
In case it wasn't there already, |conjunction=, and{{nbsp}}  is added.
	{{comma-separated entries|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|conjunction=, and{{nbsp}}}}	Y Alpha, Bravo, and Charlie
	No difference, as that parameter is already present.	Y Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, etc.
	No difference, as that parameter is already present.	Y Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie
New code is tried on {{enum}} pre-merge
	{{enum|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|conjunction=, and{{nbsp}}}}	Y Alpha, Bravo and Charlie
	{{enum|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|conjunction=,{{nbsp}}|etc.}}	N Alpha, Bravo, Charlie and etc.
	{{enum|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie|conjunction=, or{{nbsp}}}}	N Alpha, Bravo and Charlie

– MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 15:19, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the continued details. I'm worried that this analysis continues to ignore the block and inline differences between the templates. I asked the nominator to create this demonstration or withdraw this nomination, but they have not yet done so. Here is a basic demo:

The three items are {{enum|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie}} → The three items are Alpha, Bravo and Charlie

The three items are {{Comma-separated list|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie}} →

The three items are

• Alpha
• Bravo
• Charlie

The three items are {{Comma-separated entries|Alpha|Bravo|Charlie}} → The three items are Alpha, Bravo, Charlie

I hope that this simple demonstration shows why a straight merge, at least of {{Comma-separated list}}, is not yet possible. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:27, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

they have not yet done so
As they explained already, they have not done because they do not have the time nor the skills do do it themselves, which is why they opened this discussion.

They have also asked you twice to point them to a page that states that "The burden is on [the nom] to demonstrate that this merge is possible", yet you have not yet done so FaviFake (talk) 20:03, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. Per editor Jonesey95, there does not seem to be any feasible way to merge an inline type template with a block type template. The image I get in my mind is planet Saturn floating on the surface of the Pacific Ocean. I have to agree that a discussion about this in a (such as) less formal venue would be better if the nom somehow thinks this merge can actually take place. I don't think it can. And when another TE with many years experience needs to see a demonstration that all of the current features of each template can be preserved, then I think a nominator would accomplish much more by being cooperative, whether or not it is stated on some page somewhere. I could be wrong. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 12:54, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

  Wait, I have nominated 3 templates, not just 2. If they are inline and block templates, can't at least one of them be merged into another? FaviFake (talk) 23:03, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

  That is a good question! and one which can be better answered in an informal discussion in a different venue. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 23:11, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:Dupax del Norte anti-mining protests map

• Template:Dupax del Norte anti-mining protests map (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single-use article content template. Just copy into article and delete. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:52, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

Oppose. Take a look at the source code of the map. Do we really need all of that in an article? Axolitl (talk | contribs) 15:18, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep due to the complex nature of this map code. Maps and graphs of this type are typically kept in template space as an exception to the general guideline about article content. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:31, 26 September 2026 (UTC)
• Very Strong Oppose (the strongest oppose possible): The code is literally 7200+ line. that code would instantly bloat the article if merged, it would be hell to scroll to just edit in source. I suggest WP:TROUTing the nom. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 15:34, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  The template is broken now on many pages, for example Battle of Kosovo (1448) OrionNimrod (talk) 16:35, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

  This template is used on only one page, and not that one. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:13, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

Strong oppose. Such a large amount of code would insanely and unnecessarily bloat the article page. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 21:56, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

• support if we can move most of the code to wikidata per these examples. Frietjes (talk) 15:17, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Oppose (as creator) for the reasons above re. map code, but also because I had planned to use it on Mining in Nueva Vizcaya, a general overview on mining in the province. Unfortunately, I've been very busy these past few months so I have been unable to write it fast enough to be able to use this template in another page. Chlod (say hi!) 09:47, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Old discussions

September 25

Template:Seattle Seahawks 35th anniversary team

• Template:Seattle Seahawks 35th anniversary team (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single-use article content template. Copy into article and delete. Thanks to Flowerkiller1692 for noticing this one. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:09, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

• delete, now moved to Seattle_Seahawks#35th_Anniversary_Team_(2010). Frietjes (talk) 15:20, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

September 24

Template:Somali name

• Template:Somali name (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming discussions to explain why it exists. Created one month ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:53, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

@Jonesey95 Is your reason for deletion the lack of documentation? – Ike Lek (talk) 22:46, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

No; a lack of documentation means that there is no explanation for why it exists. Templates with no transclusions are often deleted, per the TFD criteria. Only templates that are useful are kept. Without documentation (which the template guidelines require) or a discussion leading to the template's creation, there is no way for editors to know how or if the template is useful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:50, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

It seems pretty self explanatory to me how it's used and why it exists. Same reason as any other template in Category:Hatnote templates for names. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:30, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. A major problem with this template is that there is no article Somali name, and pages Somali language and Somalis do not make us wiser whether this template is correct at all. If one looks into Category:Ethnic Somali people, one see plenty of 2-, 3-, and even 4-part names. Another problem, in 90% of bios we cannot find refs that, e.g., the grandfather of Hussein Mohamed Adam was Adam, and not the his father was Mohamed Adam and not that he had a double birth name Hussein Mohamed and his father was Adam. So we cannot even reliably apply it. --Altenmann >talk 18:56, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:43, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:National men's lacrosse sixes team right

• Template:National men's lacrosse sixes team right (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or incoming discussions to explain why it exists. Created one month ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:53, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

The template does have a translation at Template:National men's lacrosse sixes team right/doc meant for lacrosse sixes teams. The field lacrosse counterpart is Template:il6m Hariboneagle927 (talk) 17:09, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

A transclusion in the template's own documentation is not considered a transclusion for TfD purposes, since the template documentation will be deleted along with the unused template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:37, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:43, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• delete, unused. Frietjes (talk) 15:20, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Line 4 (Ho Chi Minh City Metro)

• Template:Line 4 (Ho Chi Minh City Metro) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or incoming discussions to explain why it exists. Created one month ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:54, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

• See my comments at the TfD for Line 5. Fork99 (talk) 14:54, 14 September 2026 (UTC)
• Userfy per Fork99. Useddenim (talk) 14:11, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:42, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Italy women's volleyball squad 2020 Summer Olympics

• Template:Italy women's volleyball squad 2020 Summer Olympics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or incoming discussions to explain why it exists. Created one month ago. We don't usually create roster navboxes for non-winning teams. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:55, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

• weak keep, part of a series (Category:2020 Summer Olympics volleyball squad navigational boxes) although I could see a case to be made for deleting all non-medal winning team navboxes. Frietjes (talk) 19:52, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:42, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Sweat smile

• Template:Sweat smile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming discussions to explain why it exists. Redundant to {{emoji|name=sweat_smile}}. Created about two months ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:06, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep. It's a wrapper that directly invokes {{emoji|name=sweat_smile}}, so there is no redundant code, and it may be easier for editors to remember to type. It's not going to have transclusions because it's generally going to be substituted. Sdkb ^talk 14:30, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:42, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep. Can't see that we would need this template name for anything else. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 19:42, 28 September 2026 (UTC).

Template:All stars football squad player

• Template:All stars football squad break (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:All stars football squad player (goals) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:All stars football squad player (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:All stars football squad start (goals) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:All stars football squad start (no caps) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:All stars football squad start (recent) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:All stars football squad start (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming discussions to explain why it exists. Created about two months ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:07, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Was supposed to be for this but it kept getting changed. Schestos (talk) 12:42, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:42, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• delete, unused. Frietjes (talk) 15:25, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
• Not sure but if they are deleted Template:All stars football squad start/styles.css should probably go too. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:08, 28 September 2026 (UTC).
  
• delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:06, 29 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. / RemoveRedSky ^[talk] 14:43, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Thabazimbi POI

• Template:Thabazimbi POI (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, categories, or incoming discussions to explain why it exists. Created about two months ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:11, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Jonesey95, thanks for the feedback. Have updated the status with a POI table Derek J Moore (talk) 19:58, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

@Derek J Moore Since this template is clearly not quite ready for primetime, would you like it moved into your userspace as a draft until it's ready to be published? --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:53, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:42, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:History of the Berbers

• Template:History of the Berbers (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming discussions to explain why it exists. Created about two years ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:14, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment: See Template talk:History of the Berbers for context, because I've removed many of the transclusions recently for the reasons stated there. Personally, I prefer deletion because I think the template is at best unnecessary, but there are other sidebar templates that in my view have similar scope and size problems (e.g. Template:Arabic culture), so I don't know if it's a fair solution or whether it can be salvaged in some other way. R Prazeres (talk) 18:11, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:42, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment: R Prazeres - would you be able to slim it down to only relevant entries? Or is it a lost cause? All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:11, 28 September 2026 (UTC).

I guess my short answer is no, delete. I think in its current form and conception the template is not useful to Wikipedia and making it useful would really mean changing its scope and turning it into an almost entirely new template. (E.g. on the talk page I suggested having a template about recent Berber identity politics and history only, but I was just thinking out loud and I don't feel up to the task of figuring that out myself.) We already have too many navboxes on North African history, I would rather delete this and encourage similar reconsideration of other similar templates as needed. R Prazeres (talk) 20:30, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Line 5 (Ho Chi Minh Metro)

• Template:Line 5 (Ho Chi Minh Metro) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or incoming discussions to explain why it exists. Created one month ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:15, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

• I'd imagine this would be used on Line 5 (Ho Chi Minh City Metro), but as it currently doesn't exist, there's nowhere it could be transcluded. It might exist in the future (see Ho Chi Minh City Metro) and would need to be recreated from scratch if deleted and the article is created. Too bad I don't think there's a userfy option at TfD. Fork99 (talk) 14:48, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Userfy per Fork99. Useddenim (talk) 14:09, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Fork99 do you want it userfied to you? If so I'm happy to close this and move it... (please {{ping|Zackmann08}} me in your reply). Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:32, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

@Zackmann08: nah I'm not likely to remember to keep tabs on whether that metro line article is created and I've no interest in creating it, although I might put it on my watchlist preemptively. The original creator might but as they've not responded to this, no idea what they think. Thanks for the offer though! Fork99 (talk) 04:22, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Normally, userfying moves the template to the creator's user space. That would be Bbbbuuuunnnn. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:47, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:42, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep This will be useful if/when a Line 5 article is created. There's no point throwing it away out of an excess of zeal. There's no better place for it than the current location. Ensure it's correctly categorized. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 14:46, 25 September 2026 (UTC).

Template:Gwenpool

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

Recently created navbox that is just a collection of related links for associated characters that are not explicitly defined to this character alone, plus a plethora of redirects. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 12:31, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment: Apparently, the creator previously contested speedy deletion arguing that this template was a copy of its Italian equivalent and not a recreation of the previously deleted ones, which were repeatedly recreated by socks and got this template salted. This may be a continuation of that sock, so salting should be reinstated. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 12:35, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment: Hi, I'm the creator of the new version of the template, I'm sorry for making trouble creating the template. I know nothing about its history, I just wanted to translate the italian version of it. I can assure I'm not a sock of any previeus account, I'm actually an Italian user and I mainly work for the italian Wikipedia, you can check there. Mikirito 07 (talk) 15:08, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I just found it concerning that this template was recreated yet again, though you're in the clear. However, now that @Fiction Fanatic III (pardon the courtesy ping) removed only some of the redirect entries from the navbox, there are still a few issues with it that remain. The Unbelievable Gwenpool is the only entry that directly correlates with the title character, with the other characters are ones that appear in a multitude of other Marvel comics and are not exclusively distinct to this character as supporting ones. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 23:29, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:41, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep with no prejudice against judicious culling. Certainly there are entries like Jeff the Land Shark which seem appropriate. I added the artist Irene Strychalski.
• Comment: As the nominator, I would like to further emphasize that, even after good faith efforts to recontextualize this navbox, it remains just an WP:INDISCRIMINATE collection of links that are not exclusively defined or correlated to the character itself. The artists arguably are not suitable entries to justify its existence, let alone the marginally related characters. There is some overlap with the also recently created Template:Gwen Stacy, which I have also brought to TfD. WP:Not everything needs a navbox, and categories may be a more organized approach to provide readers with a way to navigate these correlated characters and comics, especially considering nsvboxes are traditionally not available on mobile devices. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥 ^{(discuss · contribs)} 16:47, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Eastern Christian Diocese

• Template:Infobox Eastern Christian Diocese (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

recently created fork of Template:Infobox diocese. if there are features missing in Template:Infobox diocese we should add them rather than forking it. Frietjes (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I agree that we should seek to enrich Template:infobox diocese to accommodate distinctive characteristics of eastern Christianity jurisdictions.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 20:38, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I think there's a lot of changes that have to be made. Make all the fields, on titles and stuff renameable, for instance. I think it can be deleted after those changes have been made. Most of the fields in the infobox diocese template are relevant for only the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Catholic churches. Halershes (talk) 21:31, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I also have to point out that the Template: Infobox Eastern Christian Diocese is pretty inclusive for all Christian denominations with an Episcopal polity, atleast that was my intention, even for Western Christians. Halershes (talk) 21:34, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

This is to say, that keeping the Template:Infobox Eastern Christian Diocese is probably the best move considering how difficult it might be to change the established Template:Infobox diocese. Halershes (talk) 21:43, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Halershes, did you propose changes at Template talk:Infobox diocese? Frietjes (talk) 22:23, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:40, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Monasteries of the Serbian Orthodox Church

• Template:Monasteries of the Serbian Orthodox Church (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Serbian Orthodox monasteries (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Monasteries of the Serbian Orthodox Church with Template:Serbian Orthodox monasteries.
This new one duplicates the old one, but also adds eparchy information and segments the information a bit differently. Are those things improvements for navigation? I don't know. --Joy (talk) 19:46, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

• @Joy: Thanks for opening the merge discussion. I am neutral on the formal outcome. My intention in creating Template:Monasteries of the Serbian Orthodox Church was to make a comprehensive navbox grouped by eparchy, listing monasteries both with and without English Wikipedia articles. It contains all the monasteries from Template:Serbian Orthodox monasteries, as well as additional monasteries that do not yet have English Wikipedia articles. If the community decides to merge the two templates, I have no objection either way. However, I would prefer the merged result to keep the eparchy-based organisation and, if possible, the fuller list of monasteries. The country grouping and the Kosovo/canonical-territory footnotes from the older template could also be retained as notes or as an alternative grouping if that is considered useful. I do not have a strong preference for the final template title. - Mmns21 (talk) 20:05, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 22:37, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• On that note, I support redlinked entries. I believe our process and thinking about red links are currently a bit broken (and need more fixing than just this). I also don't know how I feel about the images on {{Serbian Orthodox monasteries}} - they are fine on the old ("wide") layout, but on the new narrow ("standard"), they float around a bit awkwardly. So, re-reading my own comments, I seem to prefer {{Monasteries of the Serbian Orthodox Church}} layout when merged. Including a map like File:Map_of_Canonical_Territory_of_the_Serbian_Orthodox_Church.svg that shows the location of eparchies would be the icing on the cake to help the uninitiated reader. ~2026-50419-70 (talk) 09:14, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:C.D. Aves squad

• Template:C.D. Aves squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Club withdrew in 2020 and was dissolved in 2021. A current squad template is therefore obsolete. A separate entity with a similar name was set up after the dissolution, but would require its own template, if it ever reached the level of having enough players to link. Unknown Temptation (talk) 22:20, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 13:55, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - defunct club does not need a 'current' squad. GiantSnowman 13:59, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
• Tweak so that it says "final squad". All the best: Rich Farmbrough 14:54, 25 September 2026 (UTC).
  
• delete per nom and GiantSnowman --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:52, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:B-SAD squad

• Template:B-SAD squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Team was dissolved exactly two years ago . Purpose of a current squad template is completely redundant. Unknown Temptation (talk) 22:03, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 13:55, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - defunct club does not need a 'current' squad. GiantSnowman 13:58, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
• delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:21, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Party shading/Parti Rakyat Malaysia and other Party shading subpages

• Template:Party shading/Parti Rakyat Malaysia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Party shading/Constitutional Democratic (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Party shading/NUP (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Party shading/NPC (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Party shading/Kugi Uswag Sugbo (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links to explain why it exists. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:07, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep Like all the subpages of Template:Party shading, these are designed for use in other templates or pages about elections, and it is not necessary for each of the 1000+ subpages to have its own documentation. Even for templates that are not currently used, it's useful to have them for future pages that might involve these political parties for editors who are not fluent in creating templates. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:36, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

How is it possible to tell the difference between a page that is unused but useful and a page that is unusable? – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:46, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

What do you mean by "unusable"? All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:43, 28 September 2026 (UTC).

Template:Unblock link

• Template:Unblock link (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links to explain why it exists. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:06, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

The first edit summary explains why @Awesome Aasim created it: create template that generates links to appeal blocks. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:39, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

The reason I created this template is so that it is easier to link to the appropriate unblock preload from block templates and in places like H:B. I do think it has potential use and the fix would be to actually use the template rather than argue that because the template is unused it is pointless and thus be deleted. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 19:25, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Ingenious. I think it looks useful, do you intend to use it yourself, or to make others aware of it too? All the best: Rich Farmbrough 19:38, 28 September 2026 (UTC).

Template:American football roster/One-Platoon Footer

• Template:American football roster/One-Platoon Footer (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or incoming links to explain why it exists. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:05, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

This is a template I was working on for the WP:CFB project. Still plan to release and use it. If there's a way to draftify it, that would be acceptable until I'm finished. PK-WIKI (talk) 16:48, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Epicureanism sidebar

• Template:Epicureanism sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links to explain why it exists. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:03, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Hbw16-rt

• Template:Hbw16-rt (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions. This does not appear to be usable. I checked a sample of pages in Category:Women's national junior handball teams and found that the teams are all described as "under-19" or "under-17" teams. We already have {{Women's national youth handball team}}, which appears to meet the need. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:01, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: First WC of it is coming up here. Planing on doing the pages sooner to the event/shortly after. Kante4 (talk) 15:05, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Those pages are using {{Hbw16}}. Is this Hbw16-rt template needed? – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:09, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, for the handballboxes with the results. Kante4 (talk) 15:42, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: see above. In the results we always use hb-rt and the other team hb (whatever variant is needed), that's why we need it. Kante4 (talk) 08:26, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: Did you see what i wrote? Kante4 (talk) 17:07, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes. I will let this discussion speak for itself. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:32, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep I inserted them now into the article after schedule is out, so it's no longer unused. Kante4 (talk) 12:16, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:The Gazette index url

• Template:The Gazette index url (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, categories, or incoming links to explain why it exists. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:57, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep Why not ask? All the best: Rich Farmbrough 15:04, 24 September 2026 (UTC).

There are too many unused templates to ask about all of them, and editors who create template-space pages that do not comply with guidelines often do not respond; a TFD nomination notifies the editor on their talk page, which is adequate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:18, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Can you then withdraw this nomination. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 18:09, 25 September 2026 (UTC).

Comment it's a template combining Template:Belfast Gazette index url, Template:London Gazette index url and Template:Edinburgh Gazette index url, all of which are known locally as "The Gazette". I've just added categories. ~2026-52389-43 (talk) 07:19, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:CCHE

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

No transclusions, documentation, or incoming links from discussions to explain why it exists. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:57, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• comment, it looks like this is just an index of the templates associated with Template:CCHE/2026/invitation to keep it from being deleted as a unused subpage. It looks like the event will be over in a couple weeks and there will no longer be a need for this invitation. Frietjes (talk) 15:28, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
• Comment on comment No need if it is subst'ed everywhere, increasing database size considerably. If it is used as a template, we will need to preserve it to preserve talk page history and talk page archives. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 19:40, 28 September 2026 (UTC).
  

September 23

Template:Far-right politics sidebar

• Template:Far-right politics sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A new addition (made a few days ago) to our heaps of useless, overbroad sidebar templates. Nearly every entry in this navbox is violative of WP:SIDEBAR and further, WP:NAVBOX. This does not help navigation with anything and is crammed with useless links - the entire principles section is violative of WP:BIDIRECTIONAL and the focus requirements of SIDEBAR, there are numerous links to disambiguation pages and redirects. Extremely, extremely minor ideologies that were coined in the past few years (militant accelerationism) are presented alongside "Populism" as "main ideologies", when they are not main ideologies. We do not need more visual cruft on the sides of these articles, this adds nothing, this does not match how people would realistically navigate this topic. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:26, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. This template is indeed a mess, and where it contains things are legitimately far-right, those tend to already be covered in other sidebars like Template:Fascism sidebar. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:56, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - Just saw this added to a clearly inappropriate page and thought "not another one". We already have Template:Fascism sidebar, various country sidebars such as Template:Far-right politics in the United Kingdom sidebar, and various right wing and conservatism sidebars. This one is created without discussion, and is stuffed full of an editor collated synthesis of pages that are clearly not tightly related to any subject. Also per the nom., this is not useful. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:17, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• Strong Keep - Not all far-right politics is fascism, so the Template:Fascism sidebar alone is not enough. Moreover, not every country has a far-right sidebar. I think this tem is very useful. ProgramT (talk) 07:35, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  To be clear, my "delete" is very strong too. This template has 125 links so far, and 89 of them are not WP:BIDIRECTIONAL. You say Fascism sidebar is not enough. But among those 125 links are links to neo-fascism, List of fascist movements, List of fascist movements by country, para-fascism, proto-fascism and the very first ideology link, of course, is fascism. The fascism sidebar is highly duplicative of this template (or rather, this one duplicates that). If you want to argue that the fascism template should be renamed because it is actually broader than fascism (and it is, as it stands now, and if it were pared back it would be duplicative of Template:Nazism sidebar) then that is a move discussion for that template. But no, we don't need two duplicative templates that will get added to the same pages and link to the same things. This undiscussed synthetic and duplicative creation is not good for the encyclopaedia. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:28, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  In that case, instead of deleting the Template:Far-right politics sidebar, it should be improved. ProgramT (talk) 08:50, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  It is not possible to improve this template (as demonstrated by the edit history). The very concept of this template is problematic and it adds visual cruft on every article it is placed on. It adds nothing and does not actually serve as navigation. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:32, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep (and disclosure that I was the one who made the template) - While there is (inevitably) a lot of overlap with fascism and the far-right in general, it does not account for 1. far-right politics that predate Italian fascism; and 2. topics or movements uncontroversially considered far-right, but have scholars that disagree on whether or not they count as fascist (i.e. Kokkashugi). I fully understand the criticisms here, but I still thought it useful for a template to exist that deals with the far-right generally, rather than fascism (neo- or otherwise) specifically. XTheBedrockX (talk) 22:45, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  @XTheBedrockX What does this add though? No one would navigate between these topics this way, and its content massively duplicates already existing sidebars. On many of these pages we would be getting 3 or 4 sidebars stacked because of this! PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:41, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment Why did someone make this? Should all ideologies have infoboxes? Since apparently, each ideology seems to have one. The far-left politics should have one too. — KaijuEditor (talk) 23:25, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  As demonstrates the problem with this template, since its creation there has been an abundance of crufty, tangential, and highly specific conventions in contravention of WP:SIDEBAR. Nearly every entry anyone has added has been bad. It will only get worse, and this template adds nothing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

September 22

Template:Pending British Columbia provincial by-elections/Vancouver-Strathcona

• Template:Pending British Columbia provincial by-elections/Vancouver-Strathcona (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

By-election was never called and subsequently cancelled due to the 2026 British Columbia general election Epluribusunumyall (talk) 23:40, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support —Joeyconnick (talk) 17:07, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:2026 British Columbia provincial by-elections/Abbotsford-Mission

• Template:2026 British Columbia provincial by-elections/Abbotsford-Mission (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

By-election has been cancelled due to the 2026 British Columbia general election Epluribusunumyall (talk) 23:40, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

• Support —Joeyconnick (talk) 17:07, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - schetm (talk) 13:07, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Cape Epic African Women's classification winners

• Template:Cape Epic African Women's classification winners (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Just one transclusion and one blue link in the body. Not useful for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:12, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

• delete, not useful for navigation. Frietjes (talk) 15:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. / RemoveRedSky ^[talk] 14:44, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

Template category navboxes

• Template:Europe templates (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Asia templates (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This has been placed at the top of certain categories, dominating the category and leaving category navigation secondary. We should not be using navboxes to navigate categories. This undermines the whole point of categories. --woodensuperman 08:47, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Nomination format side discussion

• Combine Nomination This one should meet the same outcome as the Asian templates nomination above, whether I agree with that outcome or not. - RevelationDirect (talk) 10:55, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

 Done --woodensuperman 10:58, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment (as creator of 1): The WP:CLNT guideline gives us some latitude so I don't think a navigational template in the category space is forbidden, but it's certainly fair to ask if it's useful beyond the native functionality of categories. I'm not sure. (But, if there is consensus to delete these, we might later consider whether the some of the other contents of Category:Navigational metatemplates meet our current standards.) - RevelationDirect (talk) 15:24, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  Looking at the others in that category, they all seem to be templates navigating other templates, which are placed on the bottom of templates and are only visible in template space. In them, for the most part, it is clear that they navigate other templates by the use of curly brackets. This is a different function to what we have here, where the two in the nomination seem to be unique, certainly the only navboxes I've seen that navigate between categories of templates. Honestly they're more confusing than useful, and it's not even clear you're navigating categories. --woodensuperman 15:34, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  You're right that the rest of them are linking actual templates (as opposed to template categories) but I'd pose a similar question: do we need both Template:Spaceflight navboxes and Category:Spaceflight navigational boxes? RevelationDirect (talk) 18:31, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:FG42Derivatives

• Template:FG42Derivatives (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is an unnecessary navigation box -- most of the content lacks articles, and are unlikely to get them as they're non-notable variants. The only three that could merit a standalone article already have one (and one of those is dubious at best). Everything else would likely just be a redirect to FG 42 anyway. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 03:34, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, and WP:Not everything needs a template. The valid articles can just be linked using regular [[links]], and any other derivatives can be add to the derivatives section in the main article. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:05, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:58, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:HD 12661

• Template:HD 12661 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Useless navigation template. Two of the three links are redirects to the third link. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 01:08, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, clearly useless. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:59, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Beta Beta Beta - talk 21:31, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. / RemoveRedSky ^[talk] 00:25, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Shocksingularity (talk) 02:31, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:21, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

September 20

Template:Cite check

• Template:Cite check (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Verify sources (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Cite check with Template:Verify sources.
I'm failing to see the difference between the two, and the names don't help distinguish them either. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:10, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Merge but keep the wording of Cite check. "an editor has expressed concern..." is obvious since there is a maintenance tag. Rolluik (talk) 10:09, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Merge per nom. I agree with Rolluik on the target of the merge. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 01:10, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Comment Hum, the Cite check is different from Verify sources; the former is for when citations added to claims do not verify the claims and need to be fixed, while the latter is for when sources cited in an article are irrelevant or questionable. They clearly do not appear similar in scope or task. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:25, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Oppose - Cite check is for an article containing fictitious references, while Verify sources is for "irrelevant and questionable" citations. The meaning of "questionable" isn't entirely clear, but it's clear to me that these templates serve two different purposes. The former template is for a much more serious problem that shouldn't be glossed over. --Sable232 (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

September 19

Template:First place

• Template:First place (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Second place (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Third place (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Templates are redundant to {{won|place=X}} and only used in a handful of places. Templates noincluded as they're table-cell templates and would break things. Primefac (talk) 14:47, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. These templates are pretty good. The resulting text is displayed in bold. And there is also a nice option to use the first parameter → 3px red border.
  Used in a handful of places... For example, in this one article alone (FIBA U18 EuroBasket), these templates are used a total of 272 times...
  Maiō T. (talk) 19:33, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

  Just a thought on your last point, those 272 uses could just as easily be {{won|place=1}}. Primefac (talk) 19:53, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

  As a follow-on question, would it be better to remove the |place= option from {{won}} and use this template instead? Either way there's duplication that could be addressed. Primefac (talk) 19:56, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

  Every instance of {{won|place=XYZ}} visits 37 nodes, while {{pl1}} = 2 nodes. Moreover, {{won}} doesn't support bold text, nor borders. Let's leave everything as it is, I'd say... Maiō T. (talk) 10:16, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Seattle Seahawks Top 50 players

• Template:Seattle Seahawks Top 50 players (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single-use article content template. Copy into article and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:49, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Seattle Seahawks 35th anniversary team is also only used on one page. Why isn't that nominated for deletion? I moved it over to the page regardless. Flowerkiller1692 (talk) 22:37, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:SUNYAnatomyLabs

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

As the external link is no longer functional, I recommend deleting it. Willy1018(talk) 15:32, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

• comment I fixed the links to point to archive.org, so at this point maybe either substitute/delete or keep? Frietjes (talk) 16:26, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:42, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Rugby sevens positions

• Template:Rugby sevens positions (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single-use article content template. Subst into article and delete. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:40, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

• delete, I boldly merged it with Rugby sevens with attribution. Frietjes (talk) 15:42, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

September 18

Template:Line of Popes Box

• Template:Line of Popes Box (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or incoming links to explain why this unwieldy navbox was created. Created one month ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:53, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

The navbox was created to eventually add to all of the popes wiki pages. DOSA Catholic (talk) 23:40, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Line of Popes

• Template:Line of Popes (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions or incoming links to explain why it was created. Created one month ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:53, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

I thought a simple list of popes might be useful. DOSA Catholic (talk) 23:45, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

But it is apparently not. Lists of things generally go in list articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:11, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:2025-2026 Broadway Season

• Template:2025-2026 Broadway Season (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox does not pass WP:NAVBOX #2, #3, #4, and #5. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:20, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

September 16

Template:Resident Evil chronology

• Template:Resident Evil chronology (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A template that essentially duplicates an existing, more comprehensive series template, but arranges the entries chronologically and is based primarily on fan guides. Moreover, most of the games are numbered here, so I just doesn't see purposes of this. Solaire the knight (talk) 09:21, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

• delete, seems to largely duplicate navigation found in Template:Resident Evil and there appears to be precedent for deleting these here and here. Frietjes (talk) 16:16, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

  Arguments in those other discussions were that the chronologies were not merited due to Contra's lack of plot and DMC's highly straightforward order rendering them unnecessary. I think that these are less valid with Resident Evil, which has a lengthy storyline stretching across all of the games and numerous games and spin-offs. There is a clear rationale to include a chronology there. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:49, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  It's the same story here. Just put prequel first and not numbered games between numbered. RE story not primitive, but it isn't game of thrones either, and pretty intuitive. Solaire the knight (talk) 02:34, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep The nomination uses disingenuous and misleading language, as the supposed "fan-made" guide it cites is in fact Eurogamer, a reliable source that is regularly used to prove notability for video game articles, and which was written by journalists, not regular fans. Arranging the games chronologically increases understanding of the lengthy overarching story. I don't see a reason to delete this. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:44, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

  It's fanmade, because in games very vague chronology (especially movies, what not mention in sources, as I can see) and eurogamer just use fan system of placing things. Like many other game guides. Moreover, talking about misleading, you made it look like we talking about detailed redaction article. But in fact, it just guide for fans. And saying frankly, there no need for understanding. 90% of listed games has very simple position. Just ad zero as prequel, Veronica as 3.5 game and spinoff as 4.5 and 5.5. It's just template for the sake of template. Solaire the knight (talk) 02:26, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  If you are implying Eurogamer is wrong, then see WP:TRUTH.

  As for whether it's a pointless template, obviously I disagree or I wouldn't have said keep. I said why I think there is a point for it, to inform readers who want to better understand the story, which is a major part of the RE games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:05, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  I umply that it's simple game guide, that based on vague information and that this theme in general doesn't need additional understanding. And that this still lack of added movies after this. But if you implying, that we should help readers with the every lore nuances, then see WP:FANCRUFT. Even Fandom wiki doesn't have this. We can describe this in main series page or add to a game template as story\publication chronology. Solaire the knight (talk) 11:51, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per previous commentary on "chronology" templates. This is a WP:WAF fail. That it duplicates an extant navbox is double pain. Izno (talk) 22:36, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Delete Resident Evil does not have a confusing chronology like Metal Gear does so I don't really see the point in this box. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 15:13, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. Unlike Template:Metal Gear chronology (where the "third" game is the fifth mainline game and the first chronologically), Resident Evil has a simpler timeline that follows release order and who's title numbers are accurate to the timeline. Not to mention how huge the template is in articles. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 21:25, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:Progressivism in Iran

• Template:Progressivism in Iran (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Since there is no significant difference in content from Template:Liberalism in Iran, this template is unnecessary. Unlike Progressivism in South Korea or Progressivism in the United States, "Progressivism in Iran" lacks a clear lineage or tradition. ProgramT (talk) 02:53, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Iranian progressivism developed as a distinct strand of political thought: while Iranian liberalism focuses primarily on constitutional government, individual rights and political freedoms, progressivism emphasizes transforming social and political institutions toward greater equality, emancipation and social reform. Iran also has a progressive intellectual lineage, from Kasravi and Shariati to Soroush, Shabestari and Kadivar. Merging this intellectual lineage into templates such as Liberalism in Iran or Socialism in Iran would obscure important differences in their political and intellectual framework. Afternaan (talk) 17:26, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

In that case, shouldn’t at least the colors of the template and flag be purple/pink/other instead of yellow? (see Template:Progressivism US and Template:Progressivism in South Korea.) ProgramT (talk) 08:48, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

No problem, I've now changed it to teal. If you think purple is more appropriate, we can also change it to purple, that's fine too. Afternaan (talk) 10:56, 31 August 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 15:45, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 01:23, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Delete these are not "fairly tightly related" and so fails SIDEBAR. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:32, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

This vote is incoherent; deleting for NOT being "fairly tightly related" makes no sense. Afternaan (talk) 11:53, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. A substantive distinction from Template:Liberalism in Iran has been established. Some ideologies necessarily overlap, as they do in many other cases (including liberalism and socialism in Iran) but that does not make them interchangeable. There is a documented body of Iranian progressive intellectual thought, which is reason enough to keep the template. Afternaan (talk) 11:52, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:Missing rationale2

• Template:Missing rationale2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Di-no non-free use rationale-notice (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Di-no non-free use rationale-notice with Template:Di-no non-free use rationale.
Template is outdated and was previously used by obsolete editor Betacommand and his bot. I suggest merging this to here because it mainly focuses on missing a fair use rationale, like how I nominated Template:Missing rationale. Beyoncé and Rihanna's navy 🐝🪖 13:38, 6 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 01:15, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

I think these templates should be separate ones. Missing rationale2 is for article talk pages, if you read it it says "[[:Template:Missing rationale2]] is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use." Di-no non-free use rationale-notice is for user talk pages. If there's a Non-free file with no non-free use rationale, it would just get removed from the article and missing rationale2 would be added to the article talk page. BuickRiviera99 21:14, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Subst and delete Template:Missing rationale2 entirely, per nom. Except there's no need to merge - the existing template is sufficient as-is. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:37, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

One is meant for article talk pages in cases where there may be a FUR for a different article but not for the one in question, and the other is meant for user talk pages to warn an uploader that there is no FUR at all. Oppose unless the latter template is heavily revised to serve both purposes. A notice on an article talk page is more likely to get the attention of other editors and therefore more likely to get the problem resolved.

Despite the similar name, {{Missing rationale2}} doesn't serve the same function as {{Missing rationale}} did, so the latter's previous deletion is a red herring. --Sable232 (talk) 16:13, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

September 11

Template:Bangladeshi Summiters of Mount Everest

• Template:Bangladeshi Summiters of Mount Everest (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Fails #3 of WP:NAVBOX. This can be replaced with a link in the "See also" section to List of Bangladeshi summiteers of Mount Everest. voorts (talk/contributions) 16:04, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:11, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:LDSmap

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

As part of the merge of the numerous Template:LDS Temple templates per this December 1 TFD I came across this template. All that this template does is create a mass of maps that is placed on EVERY page about an LDS temple showing where every other LDS temple in the State/Region/Country is. This is not needed and is redundant. Placing this map on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in California (for example) makes absolute sense. Placing that same map on all 12 of the temples in California does not make any sense.

Consider a comparable example. It makes sense to show the map of where all teams are located on Major League Baseball#Teams, but when I look at the San Diego Padres page, I do not need a map of where the Los Angeles Dodgers and San Francisco Giants are. Analogy holds for any subject: churches, sports teams, electoral districts, etc. The map belongs on the parent, encompassing page, not on each individual instances page.

Propose deleting this template and placing the {{Location map}} instances one the pages where they belong and removing from the others. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:13, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

NOTE I have been forced to <noinclude>...</noinclude> the nomination on the template as failing to do causes this nightmare of a template to break hundreds of pages because of how it is used. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:22, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

• Strong Keep. Nomination doesn't even cite a valid reason for nominating it in the first place (see WP:TFD#REASONS). The argument presented rests on 2 things. The first is a TFD that involved a completely different type of template, has nothing to do with this template, and only involved merging subpages. The second--and primary--argument is that the template/map shouldn't appear on all the pages it's presently used on. That's not an argument for deleting a template; that's an argument for editing those pages and removing the template/map from them. I personally disagree with that and see no issue with the map appearing on those pages, but that's not even the issue at hand here. The issue here is whether this template should be deleted--not whether it should be used less. The nomination even says using this template on some pages "makes absolute sense." So, definitely keep. Simply feeling that a template is overused is not grounds for deleting it. Jdaloner (talk) 06:03, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

  @Jdaloner: the only reason that the template is needed is because it is used in so many places. Without the widespread and inappropriate overuse, you can simply use {{Location map}} on the pages directly, as I clearly stated in my nomination... Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:18, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

  Temple locations move once the site is announced (sometimes more as changing site locations happen occasionally), but of course all before groundbreaking. Even with that, many icons stay where it was arbitrary placed when it was announced. This is not a big deal as moving it across town is not noticeable on most maps due to scale. However, changing the status on the temple page but not on the maps, or changing it in one location and not the other can make the data less reliable which is what I want to avoid with the transition.

  For List of temples by geographic region (LDS Church) alone, temple status has to be updated for each unique map its on, typically 3 (World, region/continent, country, and/or insert), which means without this, it has to be manually changed in three locations just for this page. Similar with List of temples in the United States (LDS Church) (nation, state, and occasional insert). There's 2 world maps that's used a large one that spans across the page and a small one to list in articles like a side image. This, let alone all the other pages that need changing. With nearly 400 temples, there were 3 status changes I'm aware of this past week alone. Some states/countries have their own templates (ie California, Mexico) which simplifies locations to be edited, but template has to be the same size for all pages it covers to work.

  There was a short time it operated with manual input using Template:Location map~. There was a reason I created this template. The old template(s) before use of Template:Location map~ didn't take coordinates and maps were tedious to create and getting crowded. But it did have a lot of the features currently used in the current maps (automatic status color updates, icon labels and links) which is where the inspiration to create LDSmap so to not loose that feature. It was a lot more time on the front end to create and reference LDSmap template, but it kept everything consistent since. If a modified location map template or module could be taylored to adjust the needs of the map (pull coordinates, temple links, and icon color in one request), then it would be better than what exists now.

  When it was done manually, I felt like I was the only one updating it (one has to know how to edit it), or correcting misedits from others. I'll be starting a new job next month and won't be available much to keep this up after I start. I apologize for the lengthy response, but that's my thoughts. Thanks - Dmm1169 (talk) 01:17, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep or use comparable Yes, this template has widespread usage and used as an effective geographical locator. EVERY page is probably an exaggeration, but I'm in full agreeance that it has widespread usage as it's used in hundred's of pages. "What Links Here" finds it's used in 256 articles.

Where are most users of these pages going to find out and be included in this discussion if <noinclude>...</noinclude> is going to hide it from most of these pages? Currently, the <noinclude>...</noinclude> is still causing issues with the caption for these pages.

List of temples by geographic region (LDS Church) and List of temples in the United States (LDS Church) almost exclusively uses this template throughout. List of temples (LDS Church) where it's also used gets more traffic. "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in [State/Country]" pages (these need to be renamed to "LDS Church in [State/Country]" per WP:CONCISE, but that's a different topic). And as you mentioned, many of the temple pages use it.

The use of this template greatly improved upkeep and creation of the temple maps. The primary function of this template is to automatically change the color every time the "Status" field changes, reducing/eliminating WP:CFORK issues.

I see no benefit for removal of this template. This template addressed updating issues that was resolved by its creation. If there's a better way to present this with similar functionality, please comment in this discussion. Thanks - Dmm1169 (talk) 18:50, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

To clarify WP:CFORK issue, when the temple status changes, the icon automatically changes and makes it efficient to update. When it has to be updated in multiple pages using (pages that uses the same data for different reasons), content forks with the data is created and accuracy is diminished. If there's a way to resolve this without the removal of this template, please state so in the discussion as I'm always looking for ways to improve it. However, removal of this template, will make associated data less reliable (status color in this case). Thanks - Dmm1169 (talk) 19:25, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Per the "Use comparable" stance, per December 1 TFD it talked about merging into a module. If it's to merge it into a fully working module that can handle the same task, I'm ok with it. This template simply transforms a listed "status" to an icon text value that Template:Location map~ can handle. My knowledge of modules is very limited at best, but if there's a better way to have this done automatically, I'm all for it. Thanks - Dmm1169 (talk) 23:56, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Is there a way to automatically pull infobox content from another page? I'm just wondering to fully replace LDS Temples template without jeopardizing functionality that gives consistency and minimizes manual upkeep.

And not just talking about LDS Temples, US Census data is spread across thousands of pages. This, along with a host of other fields that could be improved by linking to a specific location. Dmm1169 (talk) 17:32, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep, per above arguments and observations. It is telling that this nomination lacks a relevant reason for the proposed deletion in question. As an observation from one who has participated in numerous AfD proposals for pages pertaining to the LDS Church, it appears that there may be a tendency to unfairly target such pages, which is inconsistent with my understanding of established policies. --User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 00:30, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

@Jgstokes: there were plenty of relevant reason[s] for the proposed deletion in the 2 paragraphs I wrote in the nomination. Before claiming persecution of the LDS Church, you should really consider the merits of the proposal. Let me be abundantly clear on this matter however, my objections here have NOTHING to do with the LDS Church. I have no opinion whatsoever on the LDS Church. My objections are 100% based on the fact that the way that the LDS series of templates are configured violates all standards of best practice established on Wikipedia. As I said in my nomination, there is no other category of articles in which every article has a map of all relevant locations. If you can find me one I will withdraw this claim immediately, but I have no found a single group of pages in which every page in the group has a map showing the location of every other member of the group. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:33, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Just as clarification: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in California (example used in first paragraph of the discussion) uses the same map template (Template:LDS Temple Map California) as the individual temples which also used in List of temples in the United States (LDS Church), and a user's sandbox. Edits has to be done in this template and is automatically reflected across all pages. Although if a LA metro temple changes status, an additional template would have to be edited as their status is reflected in both templates.

There's 2 primary issues I see with replacing Template:LDSmap with manual edits:

1) there's usually at least 5 locations that needs to be changed for each status change if manual editing is required: (Large and small world maps, List of temples by geographic location (LDS Church) or List of temples in the United States (LDS Church) (multiple locations within page as stated in my earlier comment), The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in [state/country] page, and sometimes a regional map template or insert within a state/country. With lately about 3 temples each week having status changes the numbers for manual updating is multiplied, and I just stated the locations I'm aware of. Someone making manual changes will need to know where the other input locations are. Otherwise locations will get left out.

2) this template simply converts the status field to an icon name Template:Location map~ is familiar with. That's the only command Template:LDSmap handles. There's no other reason for its existence. Location map won't take "Under construction" as an acceptable value. A user changing "status" may not know what the icon symbols are used, let alone make the proper change. That's why other inputs are predefined so nobody has to come back and redefine it other than an occasional temple name change.

If a module similar to Template:Location map~ could be created to address specific needs of LDS Temple temple maps (ie automatically convert "Under Construction" to appropriate icon without an additional template, automatically provide link, etc. with primarily the input of a temple name), and it could tailored to the understanding of a novice user, it will easily resolve what was stated in point 2. The current use of Location map~ has long input lines. This recommendation could apply to other Wikipedia topics based on their needs (ie. Airport destination map on various airport pages, etc.). To resolve point 1, there has to be a location to store and retrieve temple status data. I don't know if it can bee pulled off of main space infobox or if it has to pull it from a central template like it does now. Dmm1169 (talk) 21:15, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:32, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

comment: The map caption on most maps has not been able to function properly since the banner has been placed. I would recommend coming to a conclusion soon or place the banner in the documentation section. Thanks - Dmm1169 (talk) 14:31, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Template for discussion banner continues to create issues with map captions Per prior comment request two weeks ago, the banner needs to move to template's documentation section if not removed. Consequently, the template continues to not able to function properly with banner placed in the template. The user that nominated this template immediately invoked <noinclude>...</noinclude> to that banner due to other issues that is created (see further up in discussion - immediately after nomination) prohibiting any related messages from being seen in main space anyway. It is prohibitive to get additional discussion from page viewers when banner template cannot invoke text onto mainspace or anywhere else outside the template page. - Dmm1169 (talk) 18:23, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

A typical map caption typically shows something like this when using LDSmap Template,

• = Operating
• = Under construction
• = Announced
• = Temporarily Closed

but now shows something like this since the banner with <noinclude>...</noinclude> placed.

• = Operating
• = Under construction
• = Announced
• = Temporarily Closed

- Dmm1169 (talk) 18:50, 29 September 2026 (UTC)

I think I got it fixed (above now displaying correctly). I removed line break that was added with the banner. <noinclude>...</noinclude> is still being used and still preventing related banner text from being displayed in mainspace or other locations where the template is being used. Dmm1169 (talk) 13:02, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Template:2026–27 Big Bash League table

• Template:2026–27 Big Bash League table (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Just a plain wikitable, could be replaced with WP:LST instead. Vestrian24Bio 13:42, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:28, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:2026–27 Women's Big Bash League table

• Template:2026–27 Women's Big Bash League table (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Just a plain wikitable, could be replaced with WP:LST instead. Vestrian24Bio 13:43, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:28, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Template:2027 SA20 table

• Template:2027 SA20 table (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Just a plain wikitable, could be replaced with WP:LST instead. Vestrian24Bio 13:43, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:28, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Completed discussions

A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at the "Holding Cell".

For an index of all old and archived discussions, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives.