Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2026 April 22

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 keep. Primefac (talk) 12:00, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Yuzuru Hanyu series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unnecessary to have a sidebar, navbox {{Yuzuru Hanyu}} suffices. --woodensuperman 12:02, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

@Woodensuperman I disagree here because the navbox is only displayed in desktop view, not mobile view. That was the primary reason to create this sidebar. Many athlete biographies have a similar sidebar template, see Category:Sportspeople sidebar templates. Also, the big advantage of this sidebar is that you don't need to scroll down to the bottom of the page to have access to the biography's subpages. Henni147 (talk) 16:21, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Well we don't need both. --woodensuperman 12:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:07, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
• Keep Serves a clear purpose as integrated in infoboxes of relevant articles. It is a short sidebar and clearly serves a different navigation need than the navbox, even though it links to similar places. Choucas0 🐦‍⬛ 13:30, 24 April 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.

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. Primefac (talk) 12:02, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

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

Textbook WP:PERFNAV. --woodensuperman 11:45, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. Not everything needs a template. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:46, 23 April 2026 (UTC)
• Delete Agreed with nominator, clear WP:PERFNAV case. Choucas0 🐦‍⬛ 13:33, 24 April 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.

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 restore. Consensus here seems to be that use on the article is acceptable. Further discussion about specific placement should take place on the article's talk page. If further discussion determines that this template is not actually needed or desired at the target article, please use a {{db-xfd}} request on the template pointing to this discussion and the one where non-use was indicated. Primefac (talk) 12:10, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:London Overground Lioness Line RDT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused route template. Gonnym (talk) 09:03, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Comment: for context, the template was removed by Faisalisonline2 from Watford DC line with the explanation "removing line diagram as its redundant due to a simmilar yet more informaative one being there on the info box at the top" (sic). However, I do not think there is anything wrong with including a simplified diagram in addition to the very detailed one in the infobox, perhaps under the switcher option "show simplified diagram". Pinging @Faisalisonline2 for their opinion on the idea. --Minoa (talk) 14:42, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Well, I do understand your logic and I would’ve done something abt it but unfortunately @10mmsocket @Waltforest removed all my edits and we are trying to reach a consensus/compromise on it. Faisalisonline2 (talk) 20:10, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Comment: Generally, the simplified diagram should be the one that is displayed by default because it provides context for the article. Highly-detailed trackage diagrams, despite being of interest, only add clutter for the casual reader but should remain accessible for those who want it. If I recall correctly, there was an extensive discussion of the subject in the talk pages of the LA Metro diagrams. Useddenim (talk) 01:52, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Based on what @Useddenim said, I think there is a case to reinstate the template to the article's infobox, and the detailed diagram should be relocated in context, collapsed by default like at Grand Central Terminal#Track distribution. --Minoa (talk) 23:05, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It sounds like restoration of the template to the article it was originally at is the consensus, but not a particularly strong one so I will relist for more comment on that opinion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:30, 22 April 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.

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. Primefac (talk) 12:12, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:2016 World Twenty20 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Just 4 related pages; WP:NENAN. Vestrian24Bio 11:29, 22 April 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.

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 merge to the corresponding Countdown template/module. Primefac (talk) 11:32, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Countdown2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Module:Countdown2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template. Was previously userfied at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_4#Template:Countdown2 and restored later here. I oppose userfying this time to prevent this being restored yet again and left unused. Gonnym (talk) 08:54, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Still a work in progress. I am working on a version that paired with a specific script would count down using JS (for things like April Fools' Day, certain Wikimedia events, etc.) rather than just a static timer that needs to be refreshed. Also, more customization in the display. It has only been two and a half months since I last edited Module:Countdown2. However, if it is undesirable to keep this template/module pair as a work in progress, I'd suggest merging the new logic with Template:Countdown and Module:Countdown instead. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 14:23, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

@Awesome Aasim do not "mainspace" things that aren't done. I feel like this should be an obvious idea. This could have lived forever in your sandbox space and no one would care. Izno (talk) 18:48, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I'll take this in account for future. In any case, I did make a few last minute adjustments to the module so now both can be properly assessed based on its merits.

The reason I created a second countdown template I don't remember how long ago was because the existing countdown template did not have an intuitive function. I expected {{countdown|[date]}} to provide a countdown to [date], but instead the result is something like this: {{countdown|07 May 2026 14:16:10}} → Error: year, month, and day must be specified. Compare to the template I created: {{countdown2|07 May 2026 14:16:10}} → 0 years 0 months 0 weeks 1 day 0 hours 0 minutes 0 seconds (update). I initially was going to change the original template but since this is a drastic change in functionality, and since there were other things I wanted to add (such as a more accurate countdown calculation and shorthand functionality), I created a separate template and module to implement that. I also was working on a companion script that would count down the countdown in the template. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 20:19, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:29, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Merge if technically possible, otherwise delete. I see that the other countdown templates are already in the process of being merged, which is good. Choucas0 🐦‍⬛ 13:39, 24 April 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.

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. Primefac (talk) 12:25, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:2014 World Twenty20 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Just 4 related pages; WP:NENAN. Vestrian24Bio 11:28, 22 April 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.

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. Only opposition was thinking of a different template. Primefac (talk) 09:00, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

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

Unused character template. Gonnym (talk) 08:55, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Oppose I use this template through substitution, as is common with many single character templates. VanIsaac, GHTV ^contr_about 16:23, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I really doubt you do. Did you check what happens when you subst this template? Gonnym (talk) 15:57, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Vanisaac, with the recognition that you might not remember, could you point to an edit or two where you used this template? Primefac (talk) 12:39, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:28, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Well, that's because it was template:euro I remember using. VanIsaac, GHTV ^contr_about 22:42, 2 May 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.

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. Primefac (talk) 12:41, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:2012 World Twenty20 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Just 3 related pages; WP:NENAN. Vestrian24Bio 11:27, 22 April 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.

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. Primefac (talk) 12:45, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:2007 World Twenty20 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Just 2 pages; WP:NENAN. Vestrian24Bio 11:27, 22 April 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.

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 split to smaller navboxes based on shared traits (virgins, confessors, etc) to keep the size down. Primefac (talk) 13:07, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Catholic saints (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

There are more than 10,000 catholic saints, of whom at least a few thousand already have articles. A complete navbox for such a large topic is unworkable and we inevitably end with a rather random selection, excluding many well known saints (and including some seemingly more obscure ones) for no obvious reasons. Fram (talk) 16:50, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

While there are over 10,000 catholic saints, I do feel the current module we have is sufficient. Obviously we're not going to be putting saints like Everilda or Herbert of Derwentwater in these NavBoxes. But I think with categories such as "confessors", "doctors of the church", "martyrs", etc it is easier to highlight people like Augustine of Hippo and Bernard of Clairvaux for people wanting to learn about the saints.

So I say keep as is. ~2026-22472-96 (talk) 17:02, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

We have very obscure saints in there, and are missing much more prominent ones (judging from e.g. pageviews). Judging from the talk page, no thought at all is given to who should be included, it's just a "ask and ye shall be given" situation, any saint with an article can be included if asked. So no, there is nothing "obviously" about who gets or doesn't get included. Fram (talk) 17:06, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

I think then it should be more moderated who does and doesn't go in. I was the last two additions with benedict of nursia and Joseph of Anchieta since they are pretty important (one is the literal founder of the benedictine monks and the other is labelled the apostle of Brazil).

I would say this requires a proper clean up and not a complete deletion then. ~2026-22472-96 (talk) 17:11, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

For starters we can remove the "patriarchs" and "prophets" and "archangels" focus on saints who were post-creation of the Christian religion. ~2026-22472-96 (talk) 17:17, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Do you have any suggestions for inclusion criteria? Would need to be something stronger than notability, since they all have articles already. meamemg (talk) 20:54, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

• Delete or repurpose: the idea behind this footer seems to be providing a navigational tool to accessing articles on saints. However, there are far too many saints—indeed, far too many major saints—to make this footer ever even close to anything but a highly subjective list. However, a better approach might be creating footers for certain kinds of saints. For example, a footer for Maronite saints, a footer for Franciscan saints, a footer for saints from Sicily, and so on. Template:Catholic saints is probably more useful as a place to include links to articles on how sainthood works, different categories of saints, and lists of saints. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:33, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
• Delete or completely repurpose: this template was just added to an article I'm watching (Marianne Cope -- not listed in the template) and by template title, it seemed like a fine one to add, but it's so overwhelming as to add nothing to any article it is put on. Maybe a version that just contained the categories of saints could be justified, but as it is, it's just like embedding the entire expanded Category of saints into the each article. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 19:17, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
• Keep and repurpose: There are many saints in there that can be removed such as "patriarchs", "prophets" and "angels" and it can focus on saints that actually lived when the church was created.
• Keep: I say just do a cleanup of obscure saints and start a new talk page on what constitutes a major saint. -- AustinEmme 11:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
• Split: Have each of the existing section become its own template. meamemg (talk) 20:55, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
• Split: Each section of this Template works far better as its own Template, given the sheer number of links. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 05:49, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:26, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Split It would probably be best to split the saints by century above titles as that can be confusing. AustinEmme (talk) 17:48, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

• Split: I agree that the current template is too broad to be of much use, but I'd prefer we try to salvage what we can from it nonetheless to retain some sort of navigation. Perhaps we could split off several smaller, more narrowly defined templates. i.e. "Virgins of the Catholic Church", "Martyrs of the Catholic Church", "Popes of the Catholic Church", then each template could be organized by century for the sake of navigation. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 22:12, 24 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment to Butterscotch Beluga: "Popes of the Catholic Church" is already an existing Template! You're absolutely right about the rest of your examples, and I do agree (see my vote above) with a Split as the solution here. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 03:51, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
• Delete – It is unreasonable to ask editor matinence to constantly remove the less notable or police the inclusion of such a vast number of people. Navigational efforts by readers are probably more overwhelemed than assisted by such a spawrling template, with so much disperation. Although I learn towards delete, a split is still preferable to keeping the current form. – Aza24 (talk) 22:48, 26 April 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.

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 no consensus. I would note that for a subst-only template with a fairly specific/niche use case, a month or two is a bit quick for a nomination (for being unused), but if it remains unused after 6+ months I see no prejudice against a renomination on the grounds that it might be a little too niche to merit a warning template (or similar). Primefac (talk) 12:00, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Uw-notenglishedit-sr (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links from discussions. Created about a month ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:21, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

• Keep: I have added documentation and categories. This is a user warning, so it has to be substituted (so I would expect there to be no transclusions); and has a use for warning users that they have made an edit in Serbian. ozmoozmo@enwiki (talk:contribs) 21:19, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:25, 22 April 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.

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. I see no issue also with userfication if requested. Primefac (talk) 11:57, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

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

No transclusions, documentation, categories, or incoming links from discussions. Created about a month ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:28, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey. Thanks for the talk page message. I made this template. I'm quite new to wikipedia and templates and just wanted to know if i've done anything wrong. Is there anything i need to do to make this allowed or should i delete it. Thanks! FrostbornSage (talk) 17:59, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@FrostbornSage, the issue is that you created this more than two months ago and have not used it. We don't like to keep unused templates just sitting around on WP. Aside from this, I'm not sure why you need a template for this? We have dozens of barnstar templates to begin with. – Aza24 (talk) 22:50, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:24, 22 April 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.