Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2026 June 24

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 a soft deletion. Editors can request the template's undeletion for any reason. Primefac (talk) 10:29, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:WikiProject assessment category check (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused after this edit. Gonnym (talk) 13:48, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

That was rather a bold edit, so I guess I should provide some more rationale. I was seeing errors on pages such as Template:WikiProject Pokémon/class which were prompting editors to create incorrect categories like Category:Redirect-Class Pokémon articles, which does not exist because it is correctly named Category:Redirect-Class Pokémon pages. Rather than spend ages of my time fixing the code, I believe the onus is on WikiProjects which have decided to opt out of the standard (PIQA) scale to maintain their own assessments and categories. So the best solution I could offer was to remove the offending code — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:52, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:44, 24 June 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. (non-admin closure) Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 16:43, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Hugo van Lawick (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only one film has an article. Useless for navigation. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 14:55, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

I was planning to create articles for both People of the Forest and The Leopard Son but forgot. I would advise keeping it for navigation purposes, now that I am planning to do something about this. TheDutchArchivist (talk) 15:03, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Please see WP:EXISTING and WP:WTAF. Even so, three articles does not meet the threshold for WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 15:42, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

I see, i'll keep this in mind. TheDutchArchivist (talk) 19:01, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:44, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• delete, insufficient navigation. Frietjes (talk) 16:32, 25 June 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 a soft deletion. Editors can request the template's undeletion for any reason. Primefac (talk) 10:30, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

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

Unused WikiProjcet link template. Gonnym (talk) 13:51, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:43, 24 June 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. Feel free to renominate the entire group as (per comment below) the entire category likely has the same issue. If it doesn't, then NPASR for this template specifically. Primefac (talk) 13:17, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:United States squad 1986 Goodwill Games (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Duplicate of Template:United States Squad 1986 FIBA World Championship. The 1986 FIBA World Championship served as the men's basketball event of the 1986 Goodwill Games, so the same United States roster is already covered by the existing template. In addition, the jersey numbers included in this template appear to be unsourced, whereas player numbers for the World Championship roster can be verified through FIBA sources. Maintaining a separate template creates unnecessary duplication. Zdremon (talk) 18:19, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:43, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• comment, I would think all of the medal-winning Goodwill Games rosters should be considered together. so, either we delete all of them or keep all of them. Frietjes (talk) 16:34, 25 June 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. Izno (talk) 19:14, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

• Template:.NET Framework version history (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single use template which holds a regular table. Subst to article and delete template. Gonnym (talk) 09:04, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:42, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• delete, I have boldly merged this with the parent article with attribution. Frietjes (talk) 16:38, 25 June 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) 10:33, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:WikiProject Portals/qualityscale (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused sub template. Gonnym (talk) 13:48, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:42, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Speedy delete textbook WP:T5. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 16:43, 1 July 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) 10:33, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Metro Trains Melbourne platform arrangement (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused rail-related template. Gonnym (talk) 12:22, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

I will agree to this deletion/merger. I should've sandboxed this before making it. LachlanTansey (talk) 20:51, 24 June 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 Template:Infobox grapheme. * Pppery * _{in solidarity} 22:43, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Infobox Hanacaraka (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Infobox writing system (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Infobox Hanacaraka with Template:Infobox writing system.
WP:INFOCOL (Template:Infobox grapheme doesn't seem to apply). PPEMES (talk) 14:58, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Merge with {{Infobox grapheme}}; these serve the same purpose and we don't need a redundant infobox for a specific writing system. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 19:55, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Partial Support: I would support keeping it, but it's only used in Indonesian, Balinese & Hindi Wikipedias. I f we ever make pages on Balinese and Javanese letters, then it might come handy. ङघिञ (talk) 05:40, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:26, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose drive by nomination by editor who did ZERO WP:BEFORE Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 16:43, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

• Merge per Kepler. Izno (talk) 01:39, 4 July 2026 (UTC)
• merge with {{Infobox grapheme}}. I boldly rewrote {{Infobox Hanacaraka}} to be a frontend for that template, so it can now be substituted. Frietjes (talk) 14:18, 20 July 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 Template:Historical populations. Primefac (talk) 22:31, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Demography (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• {{Infobox demographics}}
• Template:Historical populations (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Demography with Template:Infobox demographics.
WP:INFOCOL. PPEMES (talk) 15:02, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

• oppose, two different purposes. one is for the evolution of the population over time, while the other is for the breakdown of the current population by groups. I could see merging {{historical populations}} with {{demography}} as those have the exact same purpose, but not this merger. Frietjes (talk) 15:40, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
• do not merge per Frietjes, this makes no sense. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:41, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
• Merge, or more precisely, redirect {{demography}} to {{historical populations}}, which is the better, nicer template. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:25, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

  Exactly, it should be merged with {{historical populations}}, not with {{Infobox demographics}} as proposed here. Markussep ^Talk 13:45, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• comment: the only "merge" votes are for merging {{demography}} with {{historical populations}} which is not what is being proposed here. so, I think we can close this an open another discussion if people want to merge those templates. Frietjes (talk) 22:48, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose this nomination makes no sense. per Frietjes this nomination is all over the place and shows a lack of WP:BEFORE by nominator. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:21, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rather than dealing with the bureaucratic/procedural mess of closing this discussion, opening a new discussion, and then requiring all participants to vote (again) I'm am just going to relist this discussion, strike the clearly-opposed option and add in the preferred merge target. Further opinions should be added about a possible merge between {{demography}} and {{historical populations}}.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 11:05, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Primefac, you need to tag {{Demography}} for merger with {{historical populations}} if you want to propose it for merging with a new target. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:54, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Tag updated. Primefac (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

You might also want to strike through the line in the intro of this proposal that says we're discussing a merger into the infobox. Grutness...wha? 10:52, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

• Merge {{demography}} into {{historical populations}}. Grutness...wha? 10:52, 28 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete {{Demography}} as entirely unused, without prejudice as to a future redirect. Demography is more than just the historical population implied by our template named as so, which is why this is not a redirect comment. Izno (talk) 01:41, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

  Unused? It has 130 transclusions. I agree that the name is not very accurate, and that the template should be replaced by Historical populations. Markussep ^Talk 06:52, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

  Oh, I must have been look at a different transclusion list. I'm kind of inclined still to delete it in favor of historical populations given the naming confusion. Merge any necessary function if desired. Izno (talk) 16:45, 4 July 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 keep. NPASR if a new rationale is provided. Primefac (talk) 10:41, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

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

Unused sidebar. If adds to all articles, let me know and I'll withdraw nomination. Gonnym (talk) 05:54, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

The template is now being used. CozyWinter (talk) 11:34, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep, per CozyWinter Frijfuhs (talk) 11:39, 26 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep - now used on all ten full articles listed (excluding the "related" ones). Grutness...wha? 11:01, 28 June 2026 (UTC)
• keep per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:38, 29 June 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 relisted on 2026 July 2. Primefac (talk) 10:41, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:EB1926_poster (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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) 10:44, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Drama television series by year and nationality (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Drama television series by year and nationality/core (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused category template. Gonnym (talk) 05:52, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• delete, not needed. Frietjes (talk) 16:42, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete - unused Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 16:41, 1 July 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 relisted on 2026 July 2. Primefac (talk) 10:45, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Cite_EB1926 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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 a soft deletion. Editors can request the template's undeletion for any reason. Primefac (talk) 10:48, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Additional pages (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused citation-related template. Gonnym (talk) 05:48, 24 June 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 relisted on 2026 July 2. Primefac (talk) 10:50, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

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

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was delete. Izno (talk) 19:16, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Country data Chinese Red Army (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per WP:DEL10. Wasting time is still my passion (talk) 05:43, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:21, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete as unused. Gonnym (talk) 04:20, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:35, 25 June 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 a soft deletion. Editors can request the template's undeletion for any reason. Primefac (talk) 10:51, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Cignal Super Spikers (women) roster (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused roster template. Gonnym (talk) 07:32, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:21, 24 June 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 relisted on 2026 July 2. Primefac (talk) 10:51, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

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

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) 10:52, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:2022 NASCAR Pinty's (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navbox. If added to all articles let me know and I'll withdraw nomination. Gonnym (talk) 07:34, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:21, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete - Unused Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 02:42, 2 July 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) 10:52, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:2024 NASCAR Canada (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navbox. If added to all articles let me know and I'll withdraw nomination. Gonnym (talk) 07:35, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:21, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete - Unused Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 02:43, 2 July 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 a soft deletion. Editors can request the template's undeletion for any reason. Primefac (talk) 10:52, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:2025 NASCAR Canada (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navbox. If added to all articles let me know and I'll withdraw nomination. Gonnym (talk) 07:35, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:21, 24 June 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 a soft deletion. Editors can request the template's undeletion for any reason. Primefac (talk) 10:53, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Campaignbox Abbasid invasions of Asia Minor (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused campaignbox. If added to all articles let me know and I'll withdraw nomination. Gonnym (talk) 07:35, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

The links are also in Template:Campaignbox Arab–Byzantine Wars so this template does not offer anything new. Gonnym (talk) 12:20, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:21, 24 June 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 a soft deletion. Editors can request the template's undeletion for any reason. Primefac (talk) 10:53, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Calheta parishes (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navbox. If added to all articles let me know and I'll withdraw nomination. Gonnym (talk) 07:35, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:20, 24 June 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 a soft deletion. Editors can request the template's undeletion for any reason. Primefac (talk) 10:53, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Campaignbox Khwarazmian-Qara Khitai Wars (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unsued campaignbox with only one item, so nothing to navigate to. Gonnym (talk) 07:36, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Also a duplicate of Template:Khwarazmian-Qara Khitai Wars. Gonnym (talk) 07:37, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:20, 24 June 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 keep. NPASR if a different rationale is provided. Primefac (talk) 10:54, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Ho Chi Minh City Metro Line 1 RDT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused route template. Gonnym (talk) 07:39, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:20, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep: has been added to parent article. Useddenim (talk) 06:08, 29 June 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 keep. NPASR if a different rationale is provided. Primefac (talk) 10:54, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Ho Chi Minh City Metro Line 2 RDT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused route template. Gonnym (talk) 07:39, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:20, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep: has been added to parent article. Useddenim (talk) 06:08, 29 June 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. * Pppery * _{in solidarity} 22:43, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Wars and battles involving Croatia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is similar to the previous two about the Serbs and the Albanians, but only slightly better in the sense that it duplicates List of wars involving Croatia. I don't see the point in this bottom of the article spam especially as the list already exists. --Joy (talk) 20:26, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

What's the problem here? "It duplicates List of wars involving Croatia?" So what? Lists are lists and templates are templates; each has different structure, different data, different place etc. What does that mean "...bottom of the article spam..."? I see that similar templates below for Albanian and Serbian wars and battles are "too busy". Why? Perhaps because there were too many wars and battles. Unfortunately! But for Wikipedia: Thank God that as many of them as possible are listed. Too many vaguenesses?! Too many questions?! --Silverije 23:38, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Please read WP:NAVBOX for context. They are laundry lists, they're not actually aiding navigation. It's very hard to imagine a genuine, average English reader actually going down to the bottom of e.g. Battle at Jurjeve Stijene and noticing a link to e.g. Battle of Lissa (1866) and thinking ah yes this box has been useful to help me navigate there. If the navigation box serves a generally implausible navigation scenario, it doesn't make sense for it to exist, it serves no actual purpose other than provide a fiddling ground for editors. --Joy (talk) 11:11, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

The explanation is very arbitrary and voluntaristic: Insinuating whether an English reader will go to the bottom of the template or not, whether he will notice this or that link, etc., is quite unconvincing and unfounded. If he is interested in something, he will read it, if not, he will go to the next page. The template is not a playground, but a help to INTERESTED readers (doesn't matter if genuine and average English or not) and an additional quality of Wikipedia, because such a template can hardly be found anywhere else. If some modifications need to be made to this template, that can be done, but deleting the template would only harm its potential readers and mean a decrease in the quality that Wikipedia, I hope, strives for. Those readers who are not interested can simply move on to another template or article. I don't know what exactly is the problem with the text of WP:NAVBOX. It says there that navigation templates are a grouping of links used in multiple related articles to facilitate navigation between those articles in Wikipedia. It has its advantages and disadvantages, but I haven't found anywhere that anything is prohibited. As for the size, or length, of the template, we can only, for example, take a look at the template:Philosophy topics, which is much longer. --Silverije 18:36, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

This appears to be a fairly generic inclusionist argument. --Joy (talk) 20:31, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:20, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Mentioning inclusionism is not a very constructive argument and does not contribute to a more thorough discussion. I could also say something like: This appears to be a fairly generic deletionist argument. But I won't. There are a number of similar templates on Wikipedia that are used by a certain number of readers who are interested in military, war or similar topics (e.g. Template:Armed conflicts involving the United States Armed Forces, Template:Lithuanian wars and conflicts, Template:Viking activity in Great Britain). Is that not a sufficient argument? --Silverije 18:53, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

But it's not a generic argument - it's based on the spirit and letter of WP:NAVBOX.

After seeing this, I've nominated the Lithuanian one, because it suffers from much the same issues. The other two are possibly too broad too, though it could be said that at least they don't come close to spanning more than a millenium, so they're at least less implausible. Anyway, this is still a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS issue. --Joy (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

Delete WAY too big to be useful or to maintain. Should be a list page, but not a navbox. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:20, 5 July 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 keep. NPASR if a different rationale is provided. Primefac (talk) 10:57, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Tuyến số 5 (Đường sắt đô thị Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh) RDT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused route template. Gonnym (talk) 07:53, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:19, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep: has been added to parent article. Useddenim (talk) 06:08, 29 June 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) 10:58, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Attached KML/Bogor–Padalarang–Kasugihan railway (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused as Bogor–Padalarang–Kasugihan railway was deleted. Gonnym (talk) 11:39, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Speedy delete - WP:T5 Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:22, 1 July 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) 10:59, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Attached KML/Mort Street (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused as Mort Street was deleted. Gonnym (talk) 11:40, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Speedy delete - WP:T5 Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:22, 1 July 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. Izno (talk) 19:18, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

• Template:1900s shipwrecks (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navbox. Template:Shipevents is used on the list of shipwrek pages. Gonnym (talk) 11:50, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• delete, unused. Frietjes (talk) 16:45, 25 June 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. Izno (talk) 01:25, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Wars and battles involving Serbs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per WP:NAVBOX, this template is way too busy. Most articles within it do not relate to a single, coherent subject. The subject of the template is an ethnic group, which doesn't really usually wage wars and battles as a whole, so the "involving" is doing a lot of heavy lifting - it's scope creep. The articles most often do not refer to each other, because the time span is huge. There is no Wikipedia article on the subject of the template - there's a List of wars involving Serbia, but that's a reference to a place, not a people like here. Nobody in their right mind would be inclined to link many of these articles in See also. --Joy (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete per Joy simply way too much going on here... Not helpful in any way. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:23, 1 July 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. Izno (talk) 18:41, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Wars and battles involving Albanians (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per WP:NAVBOX, this template is way too busy. Most articles within it do not relate to a single, coherent subject. The subject of the template is an ethnic group, which doesn't really usually wage wars and battles as a whole, so the "involving" is doing a lot of heavy lifting - it's scope creep. The articles most often do not refer to each other, because the time span is huge. There is no Wikipedia article on the subject of the template - there's a List of wars involving Albania, but that's a reference to a place, not a people like here. Nobody in their right mind would be inclined to link many of these articles in See also. --Joy (talk) 20:23, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete Per reasoning above about its usefulness. There are no other such templates for ethnic groups and the same for Serbs was recently deleted (see above). --~2026-38094-48 (talk) 04:31, 5 July 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) 11:02, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

• Module:Params (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I am nominating this module for deletion because this module is unnecessarily complicated and thus very difficult for anyone other than the module creator to improve, even by sandbox testing. I was only able to find 35 actual uses for this module despite the few thousand transclusions and all of those uses can be replaced with either (1) a module that can read each of the parameters sequentially or following a specific format or (2) something like {{for nowiki}} or similar to iterate over a bunch of template parameters. I have previously discussed at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Module:Params, courtesy ping the participants from that discussion: @Grufo @Ponor @Chrisahn @Snævar @Johnuniq. I concur with the comments that essentially this module is trying to make a whole other programming language that is not suitable for Wikipedia rather than simplify template writing. Potential unsalvagable monolith that can be WP:TNTed. Useful functions regarding arguments from this module can be spun out into their own module before deletion. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 18:21, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Ping failed so retry @Grufo @Ponor @Chrisahn @Snævar @Johnuniq Aasim (話す（はなす）) 18:22, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Comment: interested in this as well. I've previously commented the same sentiments posted above about this module. Gonnym (talk) 06:04, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• First ban, later delete.

The module is too complex and should be removed. The English Wikipedia is a large collaborative project maintained by volunteers. We have to use tools that many volunteers can use with relative ease. This module basically introduces a third programming language besides Lua and Wikitext. Of course, neither Lua nor Wikitext are perfect, but introducing yet another language is not a good idea, especially one as complex as Module:Params.

The module was initialy created for the Latin Wikipedia (lawiki). I think @Grufo said somewhere that on lawiki too few users understand Lua or Wikitext, so Grufo created Module:Params to make it easier for others to create powerful templates. But as far as I can tell, even on lawiki Grufo is the only one who actually uses Module:Params. I looked at the edit histories of several lawiki templates that invoke Module:Params and found only edits by Grufo. It's likely that the same would happen here on enwiki: Only Grufo and very few others will understand Module:Params well enough to use it.

In conclusion: We should phase out Module:Params. As a first step, we should ban it from being used in any new or modified code. Next, we should change the templates that currently use Module:Params (mostly introduced or modified by Grufo). Some can simply be reverted to older versions, others may have to be converted to modules. In the end, we should delete the module. — Chrisahn (talk) 17:45, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

As an example, here are two versions of Template:Etymology.

The old version is syntactically ugly and hard to read, but semantically very simple. Anyone who understands if-then-else expressions can understand the template, and anyone who understands wikitext syntax can easily change the output of the template. Such changes are a nuisance because one has to repeat them five times and be careful not to break the syntax, but there are many users on the English Wikipedia who can do that.

<!--
-->{{#if:{{{1|}}}{{{2|}}}|from<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{1|}}}|&#32;{{etymology/lang|1={{{1}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{2|}}}|&#32;'' {{{2}}}''}}{{#if:{{{3|}}}|&nbsp;{{gloss|1={{{3}}}}}}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{4|}}}{{{5|}}}|{{#if:{{{7|}}}{{{8|}}}||{{#if:{{{3|}}}|}}&#32;and}}}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{4|}}}|&#32;{{etymology/lang|1={{{4}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{5|}}}|&#32;'' {{{5}}}''}}{{#if:{{{6|}}}|&nbsp;{{gloss|1={{{6}}}}}}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{7|}}}{{{8|}}}|{{#if:{{{10|}}}{{{11|}}}||{{#if:{{{6|}}}|}}&#32;and}}}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{7|}}}|&#32;{{etymology/lang|1={{{7}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{8|}}}|&#32;'' {{{8}}}''}}{{#if:{{{9|}}}|&nbsp;{{gloss|1={{{9}}}}}}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{10|}}}{{{11|}}}|{{#if:{{{13|}}}{{{14|}}}||{{#if:{{{9|}}}|}}&#32;and}}}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{10|}}}|&#32;{{etymology/lang|1={{{10}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{11|}}}|&#32;'' {{{11}}}''}}{{#if:{{{12|}}}|&nbsp;{{gloss|1={{{12}}}}}}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{13|}}}{{{14|}}}|{{#if:{{{16|}}}{{{17|}}}||{{#if:{{{12|}}}|}}&#32;and}}}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{13|}}}|&#32;{{etymology/lang|1={{{13}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{14|}}}|&#32;'' {{{14}}}''}}{{#if:{{{15|}}}|&nbsp;{{gloss|1={{{15}}}}}}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{16|}}}{{{17|}}}|{{#if:{{{15|}}}|}}&#32;and}}<!--
	-->{{#if:{{{16|}}}|&#32;{{etymology/lang|1={{{16}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{17|}}}|&#32;'' {{{17}}}''}}{{#if:{{{18|}}}|&nbsp;{{gloss|1={{{18}}}}}}}<!--
-->|{{error|{{[[Template:Etymology#Examples|etymology]]}} requires 1st or 2nd parameter in each triplet!}}}}<!--
-->

The new version introduced by Grufo in March 2026 is syntactically nicer, but semantically much more complex. Anyone who wants to change the template needs to understand the intricacies of Module:Params. I've spent decades writing code in dozens of languages, so I can guess what excluding_non-numeric_names and trimming_values do, and maybe call_for_each_group, but I have no idea what backpurging|0|0|, setting|h/i/l or sequential mean. Why do we need three different renaming steps? I guess $# is some kind of index variable? And so on. Before I can understand the template, I have to learn a new language. Few volunteers will invest the time to do that, which means that Grufo will remain (almost) the only user who can edit such templates.

{{#invoke:params|
	excluding_non-numeric_names|
	backpurging|0|0|
	trimming_values|
	renaming_by_mixing|floor(($# + 2) / 3) * 10 + (($# + 2) mod 3) + 1|
	renaming_by_magic|#expr|
	renaming_by_replacing|^(%d+)(%d)$|%2 %1|
	setting|h/i/l|from |; | and |
	sequential|
	call_for_each_group|Etymology/lang
}}

— Chrisahn (talk) 18:30, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

As another example, here's an excerpt from the current version of Template:Wrapper, introduced by Grufo a week ago.

		{{#invoke:params|new|
			pulling|omitting|
			entering_substack|
				detaching_substack|
				reinterpreting|omitting|trim_all|splitter_string|{{{separator|//}}}|setter_string||
				mixing_names_and_values|$@|<tr><td><code style{{=}}"white-space: preserve nowrap; word-break: keep-all;"><s>&#124;<span style{{=}}"color: #767600;">$@</span>&#61;</s></code></td><td>''(undefined)''</td></tr>|
			leaving_substack|
			pulling|except|
			reinterpreting|except|trim_all|splitter_string|{{{separator|//}}}|setter_string|{{{setter|->}}}|
			snapshotting|entering_substack|
				with_value_matching||strict|
				detaching_substack|
				mapping_by_mixing|''(empty string)''|
			leaving_substack|
			mapping_by_magic|#tag|values_only_as|2|let|1|syntaxhighlight|let|lang|wikitext|let|inline|true|
			flushing|
			mapping_by_mixing|<tr><td><code style{{=}}"white-space: preserve nowrap; word-break: keep-all;">&#124;<span style{{=}}"color: #767600;">$#</span>&#61;</code></td><td>$@</td></tr>|
			flushing|
			setting|h/f| {{#ifeq:{{{passing-through|+}}}|{{{passing-through|-}}}
				| The {{#if:{{{passing-through|}}}|other p|p}}arameters passed are managed as follows:
				| However, the following are exceptions:
			}}<tabl{{#if:{{{table-class|/}}}
				| e class{{=}}"{{{table-class|wikitable}}}"
				| e
			}} style{{=}}"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tr><th>Parameter passed to {{Tl|1={{{1}}}}}</th><th>Value</th></tr>|</table>|
			all_sorted|
			list_values
		}}

I have no idea how all that substack stuff works. Maybe Module:Params is stack-based like Forth? On the other hand, the let statements are familiar from JavaScript, OCaml, and other languages... Anyway, code like this isn't going to be maintainable.

— Chrisahn (talk) 18:53, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

I think the discussion would benefit from looking at concrete examples of actual problems rather than discussing the module in the abstract. The relevant question is whether the templates currently using Params would be easier to maintain if each of them were replaced by dedicated Lua modules or by long wikitext implementations. In many cases, the reason Module:Params is used in the first place is precisely to avoid having to create and maintain a separate module for a relatively narrow parameter-processing task, which would add its own maintenance burden.

It is difficult to see how creating a dedicated Lua module would be preferable for a template like {{MOS-TRANS}}, which uses Module:Params only for capturing parameters that follow a specific pattern:

{{#invoke:params|
	with_name_matching|^addct%d+$|
	renaming_by_replacing|^addct(%d+)$|%1|1|
	squeezing|
	concat_and_call|Contentious topics/talk notice|gg}}

Or for {{Preload}}, which uses it to append preload arguments:

{{#invoke:params|
	sequential|
	setting|ih|&preloadparams%5b%5d{{=}}|
	cutting|3|0|
	magic_for_each_value|urlencode|QUERY}}

It is certainly possible to write complex code using Module:Params, but that usually reflects the complexity of the underlying challenge one is trying to address.

Looking at the {{Etymology}} example, I would dwell on this comparison: “The old version is syntactically ugly and hard to read, but semantically very simple”. Something that is hard to read is usually harder to understand, review, and correct. Also, the allegedly positive side of wikitext's poor semantics hides a vulnerability: repetitiveness, which tends to create bugs, inconsistencies, and overlooked edge cases (and in fact the old version of {{Etymology}} had inconsistency bugs).

But perhaps the clearest example is {{Pagesize table}}. Recently, the version that used Params — 13 lines of code — was replaced with a 6,000-line implementation. Whatever one's view of Params, it is difficult to argue that the resulting repetitive code became easier to maintain, especially for those working from mobile devices.

One of the sentences that struck me is: “Few volunteers will invest the time to learn this additional language”. Assuming it is a language (it isn't), who said it is an additional one? For most editors Lua will be the only language they would have to learn, whereas Params would simply be a documented glossary of parameter-processing instructions invoked through familiar wikitext syntax (again, not a programming language). Others may already know Lua but prefer to work in the template namespace rather than the module namespace. Last but not least, others may feel that relying too heavily on over-specific Lua code even for trivial tasks reduces the accessibility of template maintenance and makes Wikipedia a worse place (I am one of those, by the way).

To my knowledge, there have been no maintenance problems attributable to the module. The objections raised so far seem to concern the general philosophy of the module rather than specific problems arising from its current uses. I am also not aware of maintenance problems being reported by editors who are working on templates that use the module.

If there are particular concrete problems, I would be genuinely interested in examining those examples. That seems to me to be a more productive basis for discussion than general disagreements about programming style.

We can also invite here the people who have created templates with Module:Params and ask how they feel about the concerns raised here: @Chaotic Enby (for {{ProdwarningLLM-batch}}), @Raladic (for {{MOS-TRANS}}), @Cadddr (for {{userpage}}), @Mathglot (for {{Sfnlink}} and {{Remoteref}}), @WikiMacaroons (for {{Pantone table}}), @DefaultFree (for {{Autnum plain}}), @FaviFake (for contributing at {{Wrapper}}). --Grufo (talk) 00:56, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the ping! I used Module:Params to have a list in the correct format to call {{Flowlist}} on it. It is certainly a good tool for the job as it allows to convert parameters into links and then into a bulleted list, instead of having to code a custom version of {{Flowlist}} that takes a series of titles and turns them into a list of links. And, even then, we would still need a module to move an indefinite number of parameters to that helper template.

Honestly, this module feels less like a whole new programming language, and more like a library of functions, some of them operating on other functions, that can be useful tools for specific cases. Certainly, most volunteers won't ever have to learn these functions (even I don't know most of them!), and it is more a matter of finding which one is relevant to your use case and looking at its documentation. Chaotic Enby (in solidarity · talk · contribs) 01:08, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

My usage of Module:Params in {{autnum}} and {{autnum plain}} has been limited to a single concat_and_call to invoke a subtemplate with variadic arguments. It's been very useful for this purpose, I'm thankful that Grufo wrote it, and I'm unaware of a simpler way to achieve this in pure wikitext or using an existing Lua module. I would not be bothered if a smaller module were written for this specific purpose, and basic calls to concat_and_call were replaced with calls to it.

I don't have a full understanding of Params usage outside of this. It does appear to be complicated. It also appears to be extremely well documented and learnable if necessary. I'm unmoved by arguments that it's too complicated, or that only a single person has contributed to it thus far. Looking at Chrisahn's {{Etymology}} examples above, I find the Params version to be more directly expressive of intent and written in a way that will produce cleaner diffs when modified. But I don't really have a stake in this beyond basic usage of concat_and_call, so my opinion should be taken with an appropriate quantity of salt. DefaultFree (talk) 18:26, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

I've since taken a closer look at some of the additional functionality provided by Params, and updated {{Infobox network service provider/sandbox}} to use it. Like Etymology, it groups related parameters and calls a sub-template on each group. The non-Params alternative is repetitive, supports only limited variadicity, and, in my opinion, will be more tedious to maintain. Diff here. If this discussion results in a Keep, then I intend to merge these changes back into into the main template. Otherwise, they can be discarded.

The "pipeline of serial operations on a parameter list" abstraction, I think, is the most significant contribution of this module. The formatting/presentation bits (including the setting modifier which is the subject of some criticism here) are useful, but it's not clear to me that the two concerns need to be so tightly coupled. The distinction between call_for_each_group and grouping_by_calling was not immediately obvious to me, and even now that I understand it, I'm not sure why the module needs to have both, rather than always using grouping_by_calling|...|concat_and_call|enum|... (or similar - I understand that {{enum}} doesn't support every current setting variable - but this isn't a fundamental limitation) in place of setting|...|call_for_each_group|.... A similar pattern exists for other equivalent modifier/function pairs. If we conclude that the module is currently too monolithic, this may be a good line on which to consider splitting it. Even so, I don't think this is reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater by deleting it wholesale, as it provides useful functionality that is otherwise unavailable without writing template-specific Lua. DefaultFree (talk) 22:20, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

@DefaultFree: Thank you for taking a closer look, and nice work on {{Infobox network service provider/sandbox}}. It is always interesting to see how other people approach the interface, because it often highlights things I had not thought about.

Regarding the distinction between grouping_by_calling and call_for_each_group, the reason is mainly convenience. grouping_by_calling is a modifier, so any additional fixed parameters have to be encoded inside the pipeline itself, e.g.

...|grouping_by_calling|My template|let|foo|bar|let|hello|world|...

call_for_each_group, on the other hand, is a terminal function. Since it closes the pipeline, everything that follows can simply be interpreted as ordinary template parameters:

...|call_for_each_group|My template
	| foo = bar
	| hello = world

Aside from that, they perform essentially the same task. It is not the only case of syntax sugar. For instance, excluding_non-numeric_names is essentially a synonym for with_name_matching|^%-?%d+$. However, there are occasionally subtle differences. For example, a parameter named 007 is not considered a numeric parameter by wikitext because of the leading zeros, so excluding_non-numeric_names will remove it, whereas ...|with_name_matching|^%-?%d+$|... will leave it untouched. --Grufo (talk) 23:02, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

That's a interesting diff. Would it be possible to implement that same thing with Lua code, so we can compare the difference? --Joy (talk) 05:47, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete. The examples that Chrisahn has posted are also ones that I've encountered. The params code is just not readable at all by anyone that isn't familier with that specific syntax, compared to any code written in Lua or Wikitext which is (even badly written ones). Also, pinging people you know will be on your side is the definition of WP:CANVASSING. I expect any closer to take the votes that resulted in that into consideration. Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

I think this is a somewhat borderline case of canvassing. A centerpiece of Chrisahn's argument is that Grufo is the only editor on la-wiki who has been able to use this bespoke module and it is likely that no or few other editor here on en-wiki will be able to figure it out. Hearing from other editors who find it useful—and useable—is relevant to the discussion. Having said that, hearing from a small handful of editors who have used it doesn't override the concern that it is inaccessible to a much larger group of editors. I think the input from these editors is valuable to the discussion but agree that the nature of their participation should be taken into consideration, which is not to say they should be discounted entirely. It would be helpful see other editors responding directly to the use cases offered by the fairly small group of editors who have use this module. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 18:46, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

FWIW, regarding allegations of being canvassed, I had been silently following the discussion leading up to this at Module talk:Params, which is on my watchlist. Because TFD notices for Lua modules are posted to the /doc subpage, rather than directly to the module page, it escaped my attention. I was surprised to learn that a TFD was underway when I was pinged. Had there been a notice on the module talk page, I would have been aware of this TFD organically, without a ping. And I disagree that Grufo would have reason to think that I would be on [their] side just by nature of having used the module. In fact, I noted that I would not oppose replacing basic calls to concat_and_call with a simpler module! DefaultFree (talk) 20:58, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Just a technical note: splitting out concat_and_call might work in very simple cases, but won't work in cases like {{ProdwarningLLM-batch}} and {{MOS-TRANS}}, where parameters need to be filtered, renamed, or otherwise transformed before being passed to another template. --Grufo (talk) 21:18, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

I do not really consider this canvassing. Notice the nominator first pinged those involved in the discussion against this module that was at the village pump. That seems to be canvassing in my opinion. The counter-canvassing is just balancing things to improve the discussion which was already lopsided. An assertion that counter-canvassing is canvassing is akin to counter-terrorism being considered terrorism. Regardless, the point is to increase the number of interested parties to improve the discussion. Soliciting feedback from those actually using this module hardly seems to be canvassing. I have had extensive discussions with the author of this module and I have not really even used it myself but without reservation I would agree this module has issues and need help. Those using it would probably be the first to notice its flaws. —Uzume (talk) 04:22, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete setting aside the CLEAR case of WP:CANVASSING this is a prime case of WP:TNT. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

WP:TNT seems like an odd fit here. The rationale behind TNT is usually that a system has become so entangled or difficult to maintain that starting over is preferable to incremental repair. However, I am not aware of any maintenance problems and, despite the nominator's description, Params is highly modular and rather the opposite of a monolith: templates typically use only a small subset of its instructions, and bugs can usually be addressed within the specific instruction involved without affecting unrelated functionality. The very idea of piping operations together comes directly from the Unix philosophy of building complex behaviour from simple, reusable components. Whether one likes this particular implementation or not, it is difficult to see it as a textbook case for TNT. --Grufo (talk) 16:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Most of what Params does can be done much simpler using for-loops. See Module talk:Params#Main reason why Params is so huge and complex. It would be possible to radically simplify Params while retaining 90% of its functionality, but that would be a lot of work, and the result would probably be similar to {{For loop}} or {{For nowiki}}. It's much easier to slightly extend the functionality of the latter two. In conclusion: Params is indeed a case of WP:TNT.

Regarding the question whether it's a monolith: As I explain in the linked section, most features of Params are rather monolithic. They are not orthogonal. That's why Params has three versions of many functions, and specialized functions for simple tasks like trimming strings. None of that is necessary with for-loops. In conclusion: Params is indeed rather monolithic.

"I am not aware of any maintenance problems" – Because you wrote 100% of the code of Params and (I guess) 90% of the code that uses Params. You know every nook and cranny of it, and when something doesn't work, you fix it or add a new feature. That's cool, but it's not a good fit for a collaborative project like Wikipedia. If you're not available anymore for any reason, we'll be stuck with 2600 lines of complex Lua code that nobody but you understands, and template implementations that few users except you (in some cases nobody but you) understand. — Chrisahn (talk) 10:23, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

Oppose: I am mostly responding here because I was pinged by a few other user's comments. I was not aware that "unnecessarily complicated" or the inability of one or more users to understand something constituted a deletion criteria. That said, I too have had some reservations about the development of this Scribunto module. One could argue it is limited to dealing with just parameters (and thus its name) or arguments to Scribunto modules but then again those are the main input to such modules so another could argue the scope is open-ended and this is basically a do-it-all monolith. As for the argument that this introduces its own domain-specific language (DSL), I agree this module certainly moves into that arena but then again I was not aware being such was a deletion criteria either. There are certainly several other similar instances that are not targeted here, e.g.: Module:For loop almost certainly constitutes a DSL and Module:User:Cscott/LuaTurtle certainly does not even attempt to hide it is the implementation of a computer language. And there are plenty of complex modules that have major technical issues such as Module:WikitextParser (which has actually been rewritten a few times already); one can certainly question the value of parsing wikitext (an extremely non-trivial undertaking) in Lua during the parsing and rendering of the current page by parsoid/the main MediaWiki parser. I do agree that the module under this nomination has been mostly developed by a single individual and that it has grown organically with little real peer review and the lack of such most certainly shows. However, there are plenty of instances of similarly awkwardly and some outright poorly written modules about—some are even protected under high-use or system use criteria. I personally oppose deletion under the weak criteria of this nomination and I believe it makes considerably more sense to consider instead providing the missing code review (why WP:RUSH?) and perhaps splitting it up into more targeted pieces that have better cohesion, fixing its perceived loose coupling. I believe deletion under this nomination would constitute overzealous deletion along the lines of WP:POORLY, WP:OBTOP, or WP:LACK and certainly this module qualifies under WP:DOUBT and WP:BATHWATER. I say WP:TNTNT. If you want to improve the quality of this module, that is fine but that is a discussion for its talk page not a deletion nomination. I have already had some extensive discussions with its main author and I agree it could be improved in many ways. —Uzume (talk) 01:09, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

One thing that may help the discussion is to look at the current uses of Module:Params. Looking through the templates that currently use the module, I would roughly classify them as follows (excluding experiments, userpage templates, and similar cases).

Trivial usage of Params (6):

{{#invoke:params|self}}

{{#invoke:params|concat_and_call|autnum|plainlink=yes}}

{{#invoke:params|concat_and_call|sfnlink
	| text = {{{note|1}}}
	| article = {{{article|*}}}
}}

{{#invoke:params|concat_and_call|pagelist
	| nspace = ...
	| delim = ...
	| edelim = ...
	| separator = ...
	| conjunction = ...
}}

{{#invoke:params|sequential|count}}

{{#invoke:params|
	imposing|1|⫽{{{1}}}⫽|
	concat_and_call|IPA
}}

Ordinary usage of Params (10):

{{#invoke:params|
	sequential|
	call_for_each_value|Pantone|type=formatted
}}

...

{{#invoke:params|
	setting|i|</td><td>|
	list_values
}}

...

{{#invoke:params|
	sequential|
	setting|i|</td><td>|
	call_for_each_value|Pantone|type=hex
}}

...

{{#invoke:params|
	sequential|
	setting|i|</td><td>|
	call_for_each_value|Pantone|type=rgb
}}

...

{{#invoke:params|
	sequential|
	setting|i|</td><td>|
	call_for_each_value|Pantone|type=cmyk
}}

{{#invoke:params|
	sequential|
	setting|ih|&preloadparams%5b%5d{{=}}|
	cutting|3|0|
	magic_for_each_value|urlencode|QUERY}}

{{#invoke:params|
	with_name_matching|^addct%d+$|
	renaming_by_replacing|^addct(%d+)$|%1|1|
	squeezing|
	concat_and_call|Contentious topics/talk notice|gg}}

{{#invoke:params|
	cutting|1|0|
	setting|h/i/p|:|||=|
	all_sorted|
	list_maybe_with_names
}}

{{#invoke:params|
	sequential|
	trimming_values|
	mapping_by_calling|duses|values_and_names|
	setting|i|<br>|
	list_values
}}

{{#invoke:params|
	purging|1|1|
	providing|1|Error: There is no text to show.|
	setting|ih/p|{{!}}|{{=}}|
	all_sorted|
	list_maybe_with_names
}}

...

{{#invoke:params|
	purging|1|1|
	providing|1|Error: There is no text to show.|
	concat_and_call|Error
}}

{{#invoke:params|
	all_sorted|
	setting|h/i/p/f|<noinclude />{<noinclude />{<noinclude />#invoke:svg{{!}}create
{{!}} |
{{!}} | {{=}} |
<noinclude />}<noinclude />}<noinclude />|
	list
}}

{{#invoke:params|
	sequential|
	trimming_values|
	with_value_matching|^%d+$|
	squeezing|
	setting|h/i/l|{{If|eq|{{yesno-no|{{{plainlink|}}}}}|yes||{{#ifeq:{{yesno-yes|{{{link|}}}}}|no|AS|[[Autonomous System (Internet)|AS]]}} }}|, |{{If||{{{leadout|}}}| {{{leadout}}}|,}} |
	for_each|[https://bgp.tools/as/$@ $@]}}

{{#invoke:params|
	with_name_matching|^p%d+$|
	count
}}

...

{{#invoke:params|
	with_name_matching|^p%d+$|
	all_sorted|
	setting|h/i|{{#if:{{{parts|}}}|<b>{{{parts}}}&#58;&nbsp;</b>}}|, |
	list_values
}}

...

{{#invoke:params|
	with_name_matching|^p%d+$|
	renaming_by_replacing|^p(%d+)$|%1|1|
	concat_and_call|Collapsible list
	      | title = ...
	      | expand = ...
}}

...

{{#invoke:params|
	with_name_matching|^p%d+$|
	count
}}

{{#invoke:params|
	cutting|2|0|
	discarding|title|
	setting|i/p|&|{{=}}|
	renaming_by_magic|urlencode|names_only|1|QUERY|
	mapping_by_magic|urlencode|values_only|1|QUERY|
	list
}}

Moderately advanced usage of Params (4):

{{#invoke:params|
	all_sorted|
	excluding_non-numeric_names|
	mapping_by_replacing|[^abdlp]+||
	mapping_by_replacing|a|⏒ ||plain|
	mapping_by_replacing|b|⏑ ||plain|
	mapping_by_replacing|d|⏔ ||plain|
	mapping_by_replacing|l|‒ ||plain|
	mapping_by_replacing|p|⏖ ||plain|
	trimming_values|
	mapping_by_replacing|%s+| |
	setting|h/i/f|<span style{{=}}"font-size: 1.4em; line-height: .857em;">&nbsp;|&nbsp;&#124; |&nbsp;</span>|
	list_values
}}

{{#invoke:params|
	setting|h/i/l/p/f/n|archived [https://web.archive.org/web/|], [https://web.archive.org/web/|] and [https://web.archive.org/web/|/{{#if:x|{{{1}}}}} |]|[https://web.archive.org/web/{{CURRENTYEAR}}0000000000*/{{#if:x|{{{1}}}}} search for an archived version of this page]|
	all_sorted|
	excluding_non-numeric_names|
	cutting|2|0|
	trimming_values|
	with_value_matching|^%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%d%d$|
	renaming_by_mixing|$@|
	mapping_by_magic|#time|
		values_only_as|2|
		let|1|{{#switch:{{{date-format|}}}
			| MDY = F j, Y
			| YMD = Y F j
			| ISO = Y-m-d
			| #default = j F Y
		}}|
	list
}}

{{#invoke:params|with_name_matching|1|strict|trimming_values|mapping_by_replacing|^.*$|~#!@@///
<div>%1</div>|1|mapping_by_replacing|

+|</div><div class{{=}}"intervallum-carminis"><br />
|mapping_by_replacing|([^
]+
[^
]+
[^
]+
[^
]+
[^
]+)
|%1</div><div class{{=}}"quintina-carminis">|mapping_by_replacing|^~#!@@///
||1|mapping_by_replacing|
|</div><div>|value_of|1}}

{{#invoke:params|
	excluding_non-numeric_names|
	backpurging|0|0|
	trimming_values|
	renaming_by_mixing|floor(($# + 2) / 3) * 10 + (($# + 2) mod 3) + 1|
	renaming_by_magic|#expr|
	renaming_by_replacing|^(%d+)(%d)$|%2 %1|
	setting|h/i/l|from |; | and |
	sequential|
	call_for_each_group|Etymology/lang
}}

Very advanced usage of Params (use substacks) (2):

{{#invoke:params|
	excluding_non-numeric_names|
	entering_substack|
		with_value_matching|^%s+$|
		detaching_substack|
		mapping_by_mixing| |
	leaving_substack|
	trimming_values|
	flushing|
	mapping_by_replacing|^([^:]+):?%s-$|</ruby>%1<ruby>|1|
	mapping_by_replacing|%s*:%s*(.*)$|<rp> (</rp><rt>%1</rt><rp>)</rp>|1|
	combining_values|exitus|alphabetically|h/f|<ruby>|</ruby>|
	mapping_by_replacing|<ruby></ruby>|||plain|
	value_of|exitus
}}

{{#invoke:params|new|
	pulling|passing-through|
	reinterpreting|passing-through|trim_all|splitter_string|{{{separator|//}}}|setter_string||
	with_value_not_matching||strict|
	mixing_names_and_values|$@|<code style{{=}}"white-space: preserve nowrap; word-break: keep-all;">&#124;<span style{{=}}"color: #767600;">$@</span>&#61;</code>|
	setting|h/i/l/s/f/n|The following parameters from {{Tl|1={{{1}}}}} will work here: |, | and |, and |.|Since all parameters are already managed, no parameters from {{Tl|1={{{1}}}}} will work here.|
	all_sorted|
	list_values|
}}

...

{{#invoke:params|new|
	pulling|omitting|
	entering_substack|
		detaching_substack|
		reinterpreting|omitting|trim_all|splitter_string|{{{separator|//}}}|setter_string||
		mixing_names_and_values|$@|<tr><td><code style{{=}}"white-space: preserve nowrap; word-break: keep-all;"><s>&#124;<span style{{=}}"color: #767600;">$@</span>&#61;</s></code></td><td>''(undefined)''</td></tr>|
	leaving_substack|
	pulling|except|
	reinterpreting|except|trim_all|splitter_string|{{{separator|//}}}|setter_string|{{{setter|->}}}|
	snapshotting|entering_substack|
		with_value_matching||strict|
		detaching_substack|
		mapping_by_mixing|''(empty string)''|
	leaving_substack|
	mapping_by_magic|#tag|values_only_as|2|let|1|syntaxhighlight|let|lang|wikitext|let|inline|true|
	flushing|
	mapping_by_mixing|<tr><td><code style{{=}}"white-space: preserve nowrap; word-break: keep-all;">&#124;<span style{{=}}"color: #767600;">$#</span>&#61;</code></td><td>$@</td></tr>|
	flushing|
	setting|h/f| {{#ifeq:{{{passing-through|+}}}|{{{passing-through|-}}}
		| The {{#if:{{{passing-through|}}}|other p|p}}arameters passed are managed as follows:
		| However, the following are exceptions:
	}}<tabl{{#if:{{{table-class|/}}}
		| e class{{=}}"{{{table-class|wikitable}}}"
		| e
	}} style{{=}}"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tr><th>Parameter passed to {{Tl|1={{{1}}}}}</th><th>Value</th></tr>|</table>|
	all_sorted|
	list_values
}}

Naturally, others may classify individual templates somewhat differently, but I think the overall picture will not diverge much.

What stands out to me is that the majority of current uses appear to rely on a relatively small subset of the module's functionality, although the subset varies from template to template. This seems consistent with the idea that users can employ individual instructions without needing to make use of the more sophisticated parts of the module. The more sophisticated features that have attracted most attention in this discussion, such as substacks, are currently used only in the last two templates (aside from one use in a user page: User:Thatgaypigeon/TemplateData param). --Grufo (talk) 16:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

@Grufo: you gotta stop. Responding to every comment that disagree's with you with a MASSIVE WP:WALLOFTEXT is not helpful to anything or anyone. We've been down this road before. Nothing about your nearly 11,000 byte response is worth reading or will be read. You are actually doing more harm then good. Just stop. Your bizarre rants and (as Gonnym correctly pointed out) WP:CANVASSING are getting old. Let the TFD run its course and stop dumping massive amounts of text in here as if that is going to help anything. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:22, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 00:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• delete per above, too complex with unreadable syntax. Frietjes (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete I actually sympathize with the concept of this, of having ways for templates to take and process arbitrarily-many parameters without needing a custom module, but the implementation here does not do that concept justice and just turns into a mess. * Pppery * _{in solidarity} 20:52, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

• First time seeing this, happened to stumble upon the discussion. Just some bystander thoughts.

Reading the main documentation, this seems like it could be very useful, while at the same time the scope seems potentially too broad. It's like a whole little DSL was invented for parameter handling. It can sound fun, but it implies that everyone else needs to learn yet another language, which is a big ask. I noticed that the documenation says the module tries to make things elegant, which struck me as a potential red flag, as elegance can be very subjective.

The documentation generally looks like a software project. At the same time, reviewing it and the talk history, I immediately noticed a glaring issue with something that software projects conventionally need to have: lifecycle management. Two issues with that were immediately suspect: first, someone complained on talk that the module doesn't have a sandbox at all. Those comments weren't from e.g. 2004, when everything here was fresh and with ample growing pains - they were from 2024. Second, there's no apparent mention of anyone having done a review of the code. I noticed extensive discussions between Grufo and User:Uzume, but I didn't have time to check whether the latter actually provided a proper review (maybe it's just not documented nicely enough for me to notice - if so, apologies).

Anyway, after reading several sections of the documentation, I noticed the 'setting' modifier uses single letters for parameter names. That's usually a big red flag.

I also tried reading Module:Params/testcases, but it doesn't seem like it's actually... test cases as conventionally understood here. While I'm personally not interested enough to learn by ignoring that quasi-documentation and just UTSL, it's still indicative of a genuine problem.

It looks like quite a bit of work would be needed here. --Joy (talk) 22:11, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

@Joy: Just replying to a few points.

• The sandbox was introduced in April 2024, but the module itself was created only a few months earlier, in July 2023.
• Re: no one having reviewed the code. That is possibly true, although Uzume helped me track down and fix a couple of bugs and investigated with me a Scribunto-related issue (which will probably need to be discussed on Phabricator eventually). More recently, Snævar also reviewed parts of the module, although I do not know how comprehensive that review was.
• Regarding setting, the single letters are not parameter names at all (the modifier is completely oblivious to parameter names). Instead it is used for setting different types of separators, such as headers, footers and separators between successive values. It is analogous to the separator argument of Lua's table.concat() function, except that several different kinds of separator can be used. For example, if a template named {{FooBar}} contained the following wikitext:

  {{#invoke:params|
  	setting|i|BOOM|
  	list_values
  }}
  

  transcluded as {{FooBar|one|two|three|four}} would produce:

  oneBOOMtwoBOOMthreeBOOMfour
  

  Likewise:

  {{#invoke:params|
  	setting|h/i/f|BAM|BOOM|BEM|
  	list_values
  }}
  

  would produce:

  BAMoneBOOMtwoBOOMthreeBOOMfourBEM
  

--Grufo (talk) 23:02, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes, exactly, it reads like setting h/i/f. Why would h, i and f have to be so terse? Were you trying to make it obfuscated? :D --Joy (talk) 10:18, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

This is exactly the kind of peer review this module needs and I certainly agree that setting is obscure. I do not think this module can entirely avoid all of its perceived complexity although I imagine it could be simplified in several ways but it can definitely be improved to help remove its obscurity. The author has attempted to rectify this entirely with documentation and although I feel it has been a valiant effort, I do not think this is enough—it sorely needs peer review. Once an API is available, one cannot just change it as there are now clients of such but with work that too can be rectified. I see this deletion nomination as a statement that this module is getting noticed enough to call attention to it but so far not enough for useful feedback from reviewing peers to cause meaningful change yet. This is a crucial crossroad for it. Do we throw the baby out with the bathwater? Or do we love it and mold it into something better—something we can be proud of? —Uzume (talk) 03:38, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. This module is not maintainable and makes Wikipedia templates harder to edit. Introducing new programming languages into the Wikipedia ecosystem is a big decision that shouldn't be taken lightly. The domain-specific language of Module:Params is very hard to read and therefore poorly designed for Wikipedia. @Grufo: I'm sorry it has to be this way. I know it's hard to accept that the Wikipedia community is here rejecting a project that you have put a lot of time into. Daask (talk) 15:47, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

  As I mentioned above, I would argue that it is better understood as a pipeline than as a language: each operation transforms the current parameter set and passes the result to the next one.

  To illustrate what I mean, imagine if Module:String, instead of using its current nested syntax,

  {{#invoke:string|
  	match|{{#invoke:string|
  		replace|{{#invoke:string|
  			replace|hello wozld|z|r|1|true}}|%s+|-||false}}|hello-|1|1|true|}}
  

  (which I personally find rather difficult to read),

  used a pipeline-like syntax somewhat similar to Module:MultiReplace:

  {{#invoke:string|
  	source|hello wozld|
  	replace|z|r|1|true|
  	replace|%s+|-||false|
  	match|hello-|1|1|true|}}
  

  To me, the second version is much easier to follow because the transformations are expressed sequentially rather than nested.

  Just out of curiosity, here is the current implementation of {{Quantitative metre}}:

  {{#invoke:params|
  	all_sorted|
  	excluding_non-numeric_names|
  	mapping_by_replacing|[^abdlp]+||
  	mapping_by_replacing|a|⏒ ||plain|
  	mapping_by_replacing|b|⏑ ||plain|
  	mapping_by_replacing|d|⏔ ||plain|
  	mapping_by_replacing|l|‒ ||plain|
  	mapping_by_replacing|p|⏖ ||plain|
  	trimming_values|
  	mapping_by_replacing|%s+| |
  	setting|h/i/f|<span style{{=}}"font-size: 1.4em; line-height: .857em;">&nbsp;|&nbsp;&#124; |&nbsp;</span>|
  	list_values
  }}
  

  Could you point to the specific part—or parts—that you find difficult to read? That would help me understand whether the issue is with particular operations, the overall structure, or simply unfamiliarity with the names. --Grufo (talk) 17:01, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

• If we keep this module, we need to make it simpler:
  • First, we should remove the substack stuff: 1. it's the most complex part; 2. nobody but Grufo understands it (as far as I can tell), and very few editors will learn it in the foreseeable future; 3. it's the part that really moves the module from a collection of functions towards a programming language.
  • The syntax isn't great. Grufo says it's supposed to be a collection of functions, and that makes sense, to an extent. There are similarities to Java's streams and similar features in other languages. But unlike all other languages, the module uses the continuous form instead of simple verbs, e.g. "mapping" instead of "map"

Have to run, I'll add more later.

— Chrisahn (talk) 16:04, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

@Chrisahn: A proper interface review cannot be done in the context of this TfD, where I am simultaneously trying to defend the module and remain open to criticism. If people point out genuine usability issues, I want to be able to say "perhaps you are right", rather than feeling that every design decision has to be defended. At the same time, I would encourage people approaching the module to keep in mind that it has been around for several years, has evolved through many revisions, plays an important role on at least one Wikimedia project, and is used on more than sixty others. Many design decisions that may initially look arbitrary were made to solve practical problems that arose over time. As for substacks, I don't know why you feel so strongly against them. I would at least encourage you to look at what problem they are intended to solve, because they address cases that are otherwise impossible to solve. On enwiki there is at least one example of another editor experimenting with them: see User:Thatgaypigeon/TemplateData param—they also created the nice userboxes on their user page using Params. If you are genuinely curious about the user experience, you are free to ask the editor in question (I have deliberately avoided doing so myself). --Grufo (talk) 21:02, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

• "plays an important role on at least one Wikimedia project" Yes, on the Latin Wikipedia, which has very few editors. As far as I can tell, almost all uses of the module on lawiki were written by you. That's allowed, of course, but it's also a bit of a problem.
• "used on more than sixty others" Which ones? On how many of them did users other than you write the code? I guess at most a handful.
• "As for substacks, I don't know why you feel so strongly against them." I tried to explain that several times by now in several places. You'll have to really read and try to understand what others are trying to tell you.
• "they address cases that are otherwise impossible to solve" No, they're not impossible to solve. Not even hard. Just write Lua modules for these cases. That's what Lua modules are for.

I don't know what you're trying to say with the sentence about "every design decision has to be defended". Of course every design decision has to be defended. You're on Wikipedia. Everything you do here is subject to scrutiny by others. The module we're discussing is not yours. You don't own it, you don't get to make design decisions on your own. That's not how Wikipedia works. — Chrisahn (talk) 21:20, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

I actually proposed deleting the substack features as a compromise. Many participants think the module is too complex and should be deleted. The substack stuff is the most complex part. If you agree to remove it (and make other changes to make the module simpler), there is a chance that some participants will agree to keep the module. If you don't, there's a good chance that the module will be deleted. — Chrisahn (talk) 21:25, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

@Chrisahn: This is not a battle where we delete things as a compromise. How intelligent would that be? Also here everyone has something different to say. You are against substacks (you are the only one, as far as I can tell), the nominator instead says that the module is “hard to improve, even by sandbox testing” (althogh I did not know they were trying to improve it, nor what issue they were trying to solve). The point of an interface review is exactly that not every decision has to be defended (although I am able to, at least with the information and the experience I possess at the moment), and people can bring solutions to problems I did not even know existed. Recently DefaultFree was wondering whether the syntax sugar of having some modifiers and some terminal functions doing essentially the same thing was necessary; yet, long ago, someone in the talk page was asking for more syntax sugar. Design decisions need to be taken slowly, you need to experiment with the module to understand, find possible issues, discover new ideas; definitely cannot be done in a TfD. --Grufo (talk) 21:50, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

• "everyone has something different to say" Not true. Many editors think the module should be deleted, and they pretty much all agree that it's too complex and not a good fit for Wikipedia. Sure, the details vary, but that's the gist of it. You really have to try to understand what people are trying to tell you.
• "problems I did not even know existed" Several editors have been telling you about the problems with the module for years. You just never really listened, and you're not really listening now.

— Chrisahn (talk) 21:59, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

@Chrisahn: Okay. I am all ears. You have been telling me for months that substacks constitute a problem: What problem do they cause? --Grufo (talk) 22:04, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm not going to repeat what I said. You know where I discussed this stuff before. Go there and read it. If you don't understand it, ask your questions there. — Chrisahn (talk) 22:10, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Regarding "compromise" and "how intelligent would that be" – Oy vey. Where do I start... 1. Wikipedia is built by consensus. That often means compromise. I hope you agree with that. 2. There are three options: (a) the module is deleted completely (b) we decide to keep the module but make it simpler, e.g. by removing the substack stuff (c) we decide to keep the module without any change, and you can keep adding complex features. At the moment, option (c) doesn't seem very likely, but (b) might have a chance. But if you insist that the module must not be changed, option (a) is more likely. In other words, if you don't want to compromise, the module will probably just be deleted. How intelligent would that be? I think it would be rather unintelligent. In general: Agreeing to a compromise is often a more intelligent decision than insisting on maximalist demands. — Chrisahn (talk) 22:08, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

@Chrisahn: This is not a battle between me and you. I don't have more rights on this module than anyone else on this wiki. I could not “insist that the module must not be changed” even if I wanted to. --Grufo (talk) 22:18, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

That's right, thanks for pointing it out. I guess the issue is that you're the only contributor of Module:Params, and that's not going to change, since it's 2663 lines of code, most of it much more complex than the usual Lua module. So in case we decide to keep the module but make it simpler, you'd probably have to implement the changes, or at least help others understand the code. Some of your messages ("otherwise impossible to solve", "How intelligent would that be") sound like you won't be willing to do that. If that's the case, our best option is to delete the module entirely. If we don't, you'll probably keep adding features, the module will be used here and there, but nobody except you will really understand it, and if you're not around anymore for any reason, we'll have a big problem. — Chrisahn (talk) 01:36, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the link to Module talk:Params/Archive 1#Inverting parameters. An editor asked whether the following Module:Params code in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources/Uses could be simplified. It calls {{Domain uses}} for a list of domains:

{{#invoke:params|sequential|trimming_values|mapping_by_calling|duses|values_and_names|setting|i|<br>|list_values}}

I found that code hard to understand. For example, because Params has so many features, often with somewhat cryptic names, at first I didn't know whether duses was one of them. Turns out it isn't – it's a parameter of the mapping_by_calling "function". Unfortunately, unlike a proper programming language (as in your jQuery example), the syntax of Params doesn't indicate where one function call ends and the next one begins. One has to know that "functions" like sequential and trimming_values don't take parameters (at least not in this case, maybe they have optional parameters), but mapping_by_calling does. Also, one has to know that values_and_names is not a function, but a kind of optional parameter (or modifier?) of mapping_by_calling. I'm still not sure whether setting is a "function" or rather a modifier of list_values.

Anyway, I replaced the Params code by the following Module:For nowiki code:

{{#invoke:For nowiki|template|<br>|<nowiki>{{Domain uses|{{trim{{{1}}}}}|{{{i}}}}}</nowiki>}}

Much simpler. It's just a for loop that invokes a template. The syntax isn't perfect either (I'd find separator=<br> much clearer than the unnamed parameter, and as usual there are lots of curly braces), but it's much easier to understand.

As others have pointed out above and elsewhere, most uses of Module:Params can probably be replaced by Module:For nowiki, Module:For loop or similar modules. By the way: Module:Params has 2663 lines, while Module:For nowiki has 47 and Module:For loop has 112. A huge difference for maintainability.

— Chrisahn (talk) 01:17, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

This is the comment you are referring to:

At {{WP:RSPUSES}}, I needed not |1=key|2=value but |1=value|2=key. I achieved this with {{#invoke:params|sequential|mapping_by_calling|duses|values_and_names|setting|i|<br>|list_values}} when call_for_each didn't work. Are there plans to add a shortcut like call_for_each_value_and_key?

I don't think that comment is asking for a simplification of the existing code. The editor in question is actually the same person who introduced Params into {{WP:RSPUSES}} (with the edit summary "WP:PEIS and infinite parameters"), replacing a much longer implementation (diff). Their question was whether there were plans to introduce a convenience function named call_for_each_value_and_key.

Had the proposed syntax sugar existed, the code would instead have become:

{{#invoke:params|
	sequential|
	trimming_values|
	setting|i|<br>|
	call_for_each_value_and_key|duses
}}

So the request was not to simplify the underlying abstraction, but to add a more convenient entry point for a common use case. That is exactly the sort of interface refinement that can emerge from user feedback without changing the underlying abstraction. As for replacing Params with other modules, I would be interested to see whether the same approach scales to {{Infobox network service provider/sandbox}}. That template goes beyond a simple "for each parameter" loop, so I think it would provide a more representative comparison. --Grufo (talk) 01:49, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

You hardly addressed what I said and instead discussed whether "simpler" or "more convenient" or "refined" would have been the correct word, and other irrelevant details.

Only the last two sentences of your response are relevant. I'll take a look at that infobox tomorrow.

In the meantime, see Module talk:Params#Main reason why Params is so huge and complex for a detailed discussion of some related issues. — Chrisahn (talk) 02:42, 2 July 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.